RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Self and peer assessment provides important information about the individual's performance and behavior in all aspects of their professional environment work. The aim of this study is to evaluate the professional behavior and performance in medical students in the form of team based assessment. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 100 medical students in the 7(th) year of education were randomly selected and enrolled; for each student five questionnaires were filled out, including one self-assessment, two peer assessments and two residents assessment. The scoring system of the questionnaires was based on seven point Likert scale. After filling out the questions in the questionnaire, numerical data and written comments provided to the students were collected, analyzed and discussed. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the questionnaires was assessed. A p<0.05 was considered as significant level. RESULTS: Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's alpha 0.83). Interviews revealed that the majority of students and assessors interviewed found the method acceptable. The range of scores was 1-6 (Mean±SD=4.39±0.57) for the residents' assessment, 2-6 (Mean±SD= 4.49±0.53) for peer assessment, and 3-7 (Mean±SD=5.04±0.32) for self-assessment. There was a significant difference between self assessment and other methods of assessment. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that a team-based assessment is an acceptable and feasible method for peer and self-assessment of medical students' learning in a clinical clerkship, and has some advantages over traditional assessment methods. Further studies are needed to focus on the strengths and weaknesses.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Clinical reasoning plays a major role in the ability of doctors to make a diagnosis and reach treatment decisions. This paper describes the use of four clinical reasoning tests in the second National Medical Science Olympiad in Iran: key features (KF), script concordance (SCT), clinical reasoning problems (CRP) and comprehensive integrative puzzles (CIP). The purpose of the study was to design a multi instrument for multiple roles approach in clinical reasoning field based on the theoretical framework, KF was used to measure data gathering, CRP was used to measure hypothesis formation, SCT and CIP were used to measure hypothesis evaluation and investigating the combined use of these tests in the Olympiad. A bank of clinical reasoning test items was developed for emergency medicine by a scientific expert committee representing all the medical schools in the country. These items were pretested by a reference group and the results were analyzed to select items that could be omitted. Then 135 top-ranked medical students from 45 medical universities in Iran participated in the clinical domain of the Olympiad. The reliability of each test was calculated by Cronbach's alpha. Item difficulty and the correlation between each item and the total score were measured. The correlation between the students' final grade and each of the clinical reasoning tests was calculated, as was the correlation between final grades and another measure of knowledge, i.e., the students' grade point average. RESULTS: The combined reliability for all four clinical reasoning tests was 0.91. Of the four clinical reasoning tests we compared, reliability was highest for CIP (0.91). The reliability was 0.83 for KF, 0.78 for SCT and 0.71 for CRP. Most of the tests had an acceptable item difficulty level between 0.2 and 0.8. The correlation between the score for each item and the total test score for each of the four tests was positive. The correlations between scores for each test and total score were highest for KF and CIP. The correlation between scores for each test and grade point average was low to intermediate for all four of the tests. CONCLUSION: The combination of these four clinical reasoning tests is a reliable evaluation tool that can be implemented to assess clinical reasoning skills in talented undergraduate medical students, however these data may not generalizable to whole medical students population. The CIP and KF tests showed the greatest potential to measure clinical reasoning skills. Grade point averages did not necessarily predict performance in the clinical domain of the national competitive examination for medical school students.