Cargando…

Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students

BACKGROUND: Task-specific checklists, holistic rubrics, and analytic rubrics are often used for performance assessments. We examined what factors evaluators consider important in holistic scoring of clinical performance assessment, and compared the usefulness of applying holistic and analytic rubric...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yune, So Jung, Lee, Sang Yeoup, Im, Sun Ju, Kam, Bee Sung, Baek, Sun Yong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5989338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29871677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1228-9
_version_ 1783329439560499200
author Yune, So Jung
Lee, Sang Yeoup
Im, Sun Ju
Kam, Bee Sung
Baek, Sun Yong
author_facet Yune, So Jung
Lee, Sang Yeoup
Im, Sun Ju
Kam, Bee Sung
Baek, Sun Yong
author_sort Yune, So Jung
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Task-specific checklists, holistic rubrics, and analytic rubrics are often used for performance assessments. We examined what factors evaluators consider important in holistic scoring of clinical performance assessment, and compared the usefulness of applying holistic and analytic rubrics respectively, and analytic rubrics in addition to task-specific checklists based on traditional standards. METHODS: We compared the usefulness of a holistic rubric versus an analytic rubric in effectively measuring the clinical skill performances of 126 third-year medical students who participated in a clinical performance assessment conducted by Pusan National University School of Medicine. We conducted a questionnaire survey of 37 evaluators who used all three evaluation methods—holistic rubric, analytic rubric, and task-specific checklist—for each student. The relationship between the scores on the three evaluation methods was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation. Inter-rater agreement was analyzed by Kappa index. The effect of holistic and analytic rubric scores on the task-specific checklist score was analyzed using multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: Evaluators perceived accuracy and proficiency to be major factors in objective structured clinical examinations evaluation, and history taking and physical examination to be major factors in clinical performance examinations evaluation. Holistic rubric scores were highly related to the scores of the task-specific checklist and analytic rubric. Relatively low agreement was found in clinical performance examinations compared to objective structured clinical examinations. Meanwhile, the holistic and analytic rubric scores explained 59.1% of the task-specific checklist score in objective structured clinical examinations and 51.6% in clinical performance examinations. CONCLUSION: The results show the usefulness of holistic and analytic rubrics in clinical performance assessment, which can be used in conjunction with task-specific checklists for more efficient evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5989338
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59893382018-06-20 Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students Yune, So Jung Lee, Sang Yeoup Im, Sun Ju Kam, Bee Sung Baek, Sun Yong BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: Task-specific checklists, holistic rubrics, and analytic rubrics are often used for performance assessments. We examined what factors evaluators consider important in holistic scoring of clinical performance assessment, and compared the usefulness of applying holistic and analytic rubrics respectively, and analytic rubrics in addition to task-specific checklists based on traditional standards. METHODS: We compared the usefulness of a holistic rubric versus an analytic rubric in effectively measuring the clinical skill performances of 126 third-year medical students who participated in a clinical performance assessment conducted by Pusan National University School of Medicine. We conducted a questionnaire survey of 37 evaluators who used all three evaluation methods—holistic rubric, analytic rubric, and task-specific checklist—for each student. The relationship between the scores on the three evaluation methods was analyzed using Pearson’s correlation. Inter-rater agreement was analyzed by Kappa index. The effect of holistic and analytic rubric scores on the task-specific checklist score was analyzed using multiple regression analysis. RESULTS: Evaluators perceived accuracy and proficiency to be major factors in objective structured clinical examinations evaluation, and history taking and physical examination to be major factors in clinical performance examinations evaluation. Holistic rubric scores were highly related to the scores of the task-specific checklist and analytic rubric. Relatively low agreement was found in clinical performance examinations compared to objective structured clinical examinations. Meanwhile, the holistic and analytic rubric scores explained 59.1% of the task-specific checklist score in objective structured clinical examinations and 51.6% in clinical performance examinations. CONCLUSION: The results show the usefulness of holistic and analytic rubrics in clinical performance assessment, which can be used in conjunction with task-specific checklists for more efficient evaluation. BioMed Central 2018-06-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5989338/ /pubmed/29871677 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1228-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Yune, So Jung
Lee, Sang Yeoup
Im, Sun Ju
Kam, Bee Sung
Baek, Sun Yong
Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
title Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
title_full Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
title_fullStr Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
title_full_unstemmed Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
title_short Holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
title_sort holistic rubric vs. analytic rubric for measuring clinical performance levels in medical students
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5989338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29871677
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1228-9
work_keys_str_mv AT yunesojung holisticrubricvsanalyticrubricformeasuringclinicalperformancelevelsinmedicalstudents
AT leesangyeoup holisticrubricvsanalyticrubricformeasuringclinicalperformancelevelsinmedicalstudents
AT imsunju holisticrubricvsanalyticrubricformeasuringclinicalperformancelevelsinmedicalstudents
AT kambeesung holisticrubricvsanalyticrubricformeasuringclinicalperformancelevelsinmedicalstudents
AT baeksunyong holisticrubricvsanalyticrubricformeasuringclinicalperformancelevelsinmedicalstudents