Workplace-Based Entrustment Scales for the Core EPAs: A Multisite Comparison of Validity Evidence for Two Proposed Instruments Using Structured Vignettes and Trained Raters.

PURPOSE: In undergraduate medical education (UME), competency-based medical education has been operationalized through the 13 Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency (Core EPAs). Direct observation in the workplace using rigorous, valid, reliable measures is required to inform summative decisions about graduates' readiness for residency. The purpose of this study is to investigate the validity evidence of 2 proposed workplace-based entrustment scales. METHOD: The authors of this multisite, randomized, experimental study used structured vignettes and experienced raters to examine validity evidence of the Ottawa scale and the UME supervisory tool (Chen scale) in 2019. The authors used a series of 8 cases (6 developed de novo) depicting learners at preentrustable (less-developed) and entrustable (more-developed) skill levels across 5 Core EPAs. Participants from Core EPA pilot institutions rated learner performance using either the Ottawa or Chen scale. The authors used descriptive statistics and analysis of variance to examine data trends and compare ratings, conducted interrater reliability and generalizability studies to evaluate consistency among participants, and performed a content analysis of narrative comments. RESULTS: Fifty clinician-educators from 10 institutions participated, yielding 579 discrete EPA assessments. Both Ottawa and Chen scales differentiated between less- and more-developed skill levels (P < .001). The interclass correlation was good to excellent for all EPAs using Ottawa (range, 0.68-0.91) and fair to excellent using Chen (range, 0.54-0.83). Generalizability analysis revealed substantial variance in ratings attributable to the learner-EPA interaction (59.6% for Ottawa; 48.9% for Chen) suggesting variability for ratings was appropriately associated with performance on individual EPAs. CONCLUSIONS: In a structured setting, both the Ottawa and Chen scales distinguished between preentrustable and entrustable learners; however, the Ottawa scale demonstrated more desirable characteristics. These findings represent a critical step forward in developing valid, reliable instruments to measure learner progression toward entrustment for the Core EPAs.

Entrustment Decision Making in the Core Entrustable Professional Activities: Results of a Multi-Institutional Study.

PURPOSE: In 2014, the Association of American Medical Colleges defined 13 Core Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) that all graduating students should be ready to do with indirect supervision upon entering residency and commissioned a 10-school, 5-year pilot to test implementing the Core EPAs framework. In 2019, pilot schools convened trained entrustment groups (TEGs) to review assessment data and render theoretical summative entrustment decisions for class of 2019 graduates. Results were examined to determine the extent to which entrustment decisions could be made and the nature of these decisions. METHOD: For each EPA considered (4-13 per student), TEGs recorded an entrustment determination (ready, progressing but not yet ready, evidence against student progressing, could not make a decision); confidence in that determination (none, low, moderate, high); and the number of workplace-based assessments (WBAs) considered (0->15) per determination. These individual student-level data were de-identified and merged into a multischool database; chi-square analysis tested the significance of associations between variables. RESULTS: The 2,415 EPA-specific determinations (for 349 students by 4 participating schools) resulted in a decision of ready (n = 997/2,415; 41.3%), progressing but not yet ready (n = 558/2,415; 23.1%), or evidence against student progression (n = 175/2,415; 7.2%). No decision could be made for the remaining 28.4% (685/2,415), generally for lack of data. Entrustment determinations' distribution varied across EPAs (chi-square P < .001) and, for 10/13 EPAs, WBA availability was associated with making (vs not making) entrustment decisions (each chi-square P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: TEGs were able to make many decisions about readiness for indirect supervision; yet less than half of determinations resulted in a decision of readiness to perform this EPA with indirect supervision. More work is needed at the 10 schools to enable authentic summative entrustment in the Core EPAs framework.