Cargando…

Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors

BACKGROUND: It is not known to what extent the dean’s letter (medical student performance evaluation [MSPE]) reflects peer-assessed work habits (WH) skills and/or interpersonal attributes (IA) of students. OBJECTIVE: To compare peer ratings of WH and IA of second- and third-year medical students wit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lurie, Stephen J., Lambert, David R., Nofziger, Anne C., Epstein, Ronald M., Grady-Weliky, Tana A.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer-Verlag 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1824780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17351836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0117-4
_version_ 1782132708895358976
author Lurie, Stephen J.
Lambert, David R.
Nofziger, Anne C.
Epstein, Ronald M.
Grady-Weliky, Tana A.
author_facet Lurie, Stephen J.
Lambert, David R.
Nofziger, Anne C.
Epstein, Ronald M.
Grady-Weliky, Tana A.
author_sort Lurie, Stephen J.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: It is not known to what extent the dean’s letter (medical student performance evaluation [MSPE]) reflects peer-assessed work habits (WH) skills and/or interpersonal attributes (IA) of students. OBJECTIVE: To compare peer ratings of WH and IA of second- and third-year medical students with later MSPE rankings and ratings by internship program directors. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 281 medical students from the classes of 2004, 2005, and 2006 at a private medical school in the northeastern United States, who had participated in peer assessment exercises in the second and third years of medical school. For students from the class of 2004, we also compared peer assessment data against later evaluations obtained from internship program directors. RESULTS: Peer-assessed WH were predictive of later MSPE groups in both the second (F = 44.90, P < .001) and third years (F = 29.54, P < .001) of medical school. Interpersonal attributes were not related to MSPE rankings in either year. MSPE rankings for a majority of students were predictable from peer-assessed WH scores. Internship directors’ ratings were significantly related to second- and third-year peer-assessed WH scores (r = .32 [P = .15] and r = .43 [P = .004]), respectively, but not to peer-assessed IA. CONCLUSIONS: Peer assessment of WH, as early as the second year of medical school, can predict later MSPE rankings and internship performance. Although peer-assessed IA can be measured reliably, they are unrelated to either outcome.
format Text
id pubmed-1824780
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher Springer-Verlag
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-18247802007-03-15 Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors Lurie, Stephen J. Lambert, David R. Nofziger, Anne C. Epstein, Ronald M. Grady-Weliky, Tana A. J Gen Intern Med Original Article BACKGROUND: It is not known to what extent the dean’s letter (medical student performance evaluation [MSPE]) reflects peer-assessed work habits (WH) skills and/or interpersonal attributes (IA) of students. OBJECTIVE: To compare peer ratings of WH and IA of second- and third-year medical students with later MSPE rankings and ratings by internship program directors. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 281 medical students from the classes of 2004, 2005, and 2006 at a private medical school in the northeastern United States, who had participated in peer assessment exercises in the second and third years of medical school. For students from the class of 2004, we also compared peer assessment data against later evaluations obtained from internship program directors. RESULTS: Peer-assessed WH were predictive of later MSPE groups in both the second (F = 44.90, P < .001) and third years (F = 29.54, P < .001) of medical school. Interpersonal attributes were not related to MSPE rankings in either year. MSPE rankings for a majority of students were predictable from peer-assessed WH scores. Internship directors’ ratings were significantly related to second- and third-year peer-assessed WH scores (r = .32 [P = .15] and r = .43 [P = .004]), respectively, but not to peer-assessed IA. CONCLUSIONS: Peer assessment of WH, as early as the second year of medical school, can predict later MSPE rankings and internship performance. Although peer-assessed IA can be measured reliably, they are unrelated to either outcome. Springer-Verlag 2007-01-11 2007-01 /pmc/articles/PMC1824780/ /pubmed/17351836 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0117-4 Text en © Society of General Internal Medicine 2007
spellingShingle Original Article
Lurie, Stephen J.
Lambert, David R.
Nofziger, Anne C.
Epstein, Ronald M.
Grady-Weliky, Tana A.
Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors
title Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors
title_full Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors
title_fullStr Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors
title_full_unstemmed Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors
title_short Relationship Between Peer Assessment During Medical School, Dean’s Letter Rankings, and Ratings by Internship Directors
title_sort relationship between peer assessment during medical school, dean’s letter rankings, and ratings by internship directors
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1824780/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17351836
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0117-4
work_keys_str_mv AT luriestephenj relationshipbetweenpeerassessmentduringmedicalschooldeansletterrankingsandratingsbyinternshipdirectors
AT lambertdavidr relationshipbetweenpeerassessmentduringmedicalschooldeansletterrankingsandratingsbyinternshipdirectors
AT nofzigerannec relationshipbetweenpeerassessmentduringmedicalschooldeansletterrankingsandratingsbyinternshipdirectors
AT epsteinronaldm relationshipbetweenpeerassessmentduringmedicalschooldeansletterrankingsandratingsbyinternshipdirectors
AT gradywelikytanaa relationshipbetweenpeerassessmentduringmedicalschooldeansletterrankingsandratingsbyinternshipdirectors