Premium
Reliability of global rating scales in the assessment of clinical competence of medical students
Author(s) -
KEYNAN A.,
FRIEDMAN M.,
BENBASSAT J.
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
medical education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.776
H-Index - 138
eISSN - 1365-2923
pISSN - 0308-0110
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2923.1987.tb01406.x
Subject(s) - rating scale , competence (human resources) , psychology , pearson product moment correlation coefficient , diligence , medical education , reliability (semiconductor) , multiple choice , medical school , ordinal regression , clinical psychology , medicine , statistics , mathematics , social psychology , significant difference , developmental psychology , power (physics) , physics , quantum mechanics
Summary. Undergraduate medical students of the Ben Gurion University were evaluated upon completion of their fourthand sixth‐year medical clerkships by a 17‐item rating scale, a multiple choice question (MCQ) test and a patientoriented oral examination by two academic staff members. Pearson's correlation coefficient between the fourthand sixth‐year global ratings was r=o.44 ( p ≦0.001), while that between the fourthand sixth‐year MCQ scores was r=o.54 p ≦0.001). Pearson's coefficient between the global ratings and the MCQ scores in the sixth year was r=o.25 ( p o.05). Stepwise regression analysis revealed that the ratings on the parameters ‘reliability’,‘knowledge’,‘organization’,‘diligence’ and ‘case presentation’ were the most predictive of the overall global rating. It is concluded that the reproducibility of 'subjective’ expert assessment of performance through global rating scales is comparable to that of ‘objective’ evaluation through written MCQ, even though these measures assess different domains of competence at different levels of simulations. It is recommended that the clinical performance of undergraduate medical students should be assessed by a combination of subjective and objective measures.