[X] Close
You are about to erase all the values you have customized, search history, page format, etc.
Click here to RESET all values       Click here to GO BACK without resetting any value
Item 1 of about 1
1. Adler MD, Vozenilek JA, Trainor JL, Eppich WJ, Wang EE, Beaumont JL, Aitchison PR, Pribaz PJ, Erickson T, Edison M, McGaghie WC: Comparison of checklist and anchored global rating instruments for performance rating of simulated pediatric emergencies. Simul Healthc; 2011 Feb;6(1):18-24
COS Scholar Universe. author profiles.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Comparison of checklist and anchored global rating instruments for performance rating of simulated pediatric emergencies.
  • PURPOSE: To compare the psychometric performance of two rating instruments used to assess trainee performance in three clinical scenarios.
  • METHODS: This study was part of a two-phase, randomized trial with a wait-list control condition assessing the effectiveness of a pediatric emergency medicine curriculum targeting general emergency medicine residents.
  • Residents received 6 hours of instruction either before or after the first assessment.
  • Separate pairs of raters completed either a dichotomous checklist for each of three cases or the Global Performance Assessment Tool (GPAT), an anchored multidimensional scale.
  • A fully crossed person×rater×case generalizability study was conducted.
  • The effect of training year on performance is assessed using multivariate analysis of variance.
  • RESULTS: The person and person×case components accounted for most of the score variance for both instruments.
  • Using either instrument, scores demonstrated a small but significant increase as training level increased when analyzed using a multivariate analysis of variance.
  • The inter-rater reliability coefficient was >0.9 for both instruments.
  • CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that our checklist and anchored global rating instrument performed in a psychometrically similar fashion with high reliability.
  • As long as proper attention is given to instrument design and testing and rater training, checklists and anchored assessment scales can produce reproducible data for a given population of subjects.
  • The validity of the data arising for either instrument type must be assessed rigorously and with a focus, when practicable, on patient care outcomes.
  • [MeSH-major] Checklist. Computer Simulation. Educational Measurement / methods. Emergency Medicine / education. Internship and Residency / methods. Pediatrics / education
  • [MeSH-minor] Clinical Competence. Humans. Manikins. Psychometrics

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Children's Health.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2011 Society for Simulation in Healthcare
  • (PMID = 21330846.001).
  • [ISSN] 1559-713X
  • [Journal-full-title] Simulation in healthcare : journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Simul Healthc
  • [Language] eng
  • [Grant] United States / PHS HHS / / CFDA 93.127; United States / NCRR NIH HHS / RR / UL1 RR025741
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


Advertisement





Advertisement