Your browser doesn't support javascript.

Biblioteca Virtual en Salud

Hipertensión

Home > Búsqueda > ()
XML
Imprimir Exportar

Formato de exportación:

Exportar

Email
Adicionar mas contactos
| |

Experience of essay during the clinical clerkship in emergency medicine and inter-rater reliability on essay

Ho-Jin LEE; Song-Yi PARK; Jin-Woo JEONG; In-Ho KWON; Yuri CHOI; Hyun NA.
Artículo | WPRIM | ID: wpr-834920
Objective@#An essay test is difficult to carry out because of the effort for hand scoring and the concerns about inter-rater reliability, even though the use of a rubric can increase inter-rater reliability. This study examined the feasibility of an essay test in medical school students and whether the use of a rubric increases inter-rater reliability. @*Methods@#An essay test was given to 51 undergraduate students in the third grade of emergency medicine clinical clerkship. Three raters assessed the essay test independently with a prepared rubric immediately after the test. They then did the same essay test without a rubric three months later. The researchers compared the Pearson’s correlation coefficients between raters. The researchers analyzed the validity comparing the correlation coefficient between the essay test and previous multiple-choice questions (MCQ) and feasibility by acceptance. @*Results@#Fifty-one students took the essay test. The Pearson’s correlation coefficient using rubric between raters 1 and 2, 1 and 3, and 2 and 3 were 0.898 (P<0.001), 0.896 (P<0.001), and 0.856 (P<0.001), respectively. Without a rubric, the correlation coefficients were 0.838 (P<0.001), 0.888 (P<0.001), and 0.824 (P<0.001), respectively. The new essay test showed a positive correlation (0.367) with the previous MCQ, and the evidence for validity and feasibility was acceptable. @*Conclusion@#In this study, the rubric did not increase the inter-rater reliability of the essay test. On the other hand, the inter-rater reliability was higher than 0.8, even without a rubric. In addition, the essay test showed evidence of validity and feasibility.
Biblioteca responsable: WPRO