Cargando…

A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence

BACKGROUND: In medical settings, multisource feedback (MSF) is a recognised method of formative assessment. It collects feedback on a doctor’s performance from several perspectives in the form of questionnaires. Yet, no validated MSF questionnaire has been publicly available in German. Thus, we aime...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hennel, Eva K., Subotic, Ulrike, Berendonk, Christoph, Stricker, Daniel, Harendza, Sigrid, Huwendiek, Sören
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7552497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33046060
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02259-2
_version_ 1783593412685987840
author Hennel, Eva K.
Subotic, Ulrike
Berendonk, Christoph
Stricker, Daniel
Harendza, Sigrid
Huwendiek, Sören
author_facet Hennel, Eva K.
Subotic, Ulrike
Berendonk, Christoph
Stricker, Daniel
Harendza, Sigrid
Huwendiek, Sören
author_sort Hennel, Eva K.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In medical settings, multisource feedback (MSF) is a recognised method of formative assessment. It collects feedback on a doctor’s performance from several perspectives in the form of questionnaires. Yet, no validated MSF questionnaire has been publicly available in German. Thus, we aimed to develop a German MSF questionnaire based on the CanMEDS roles and to investigate the evidence of its validity. METHODS: We developed a competency-based MSF questionnaire in German, informed by the literature and expert input. Four sources of validity evidence were investigated: (i) Content was examined based on MSF literature, blueprints of competency, and expert-team discussions. (ii) The response process was supported by analysis of a think-aloud study, narrative comments, “unable to comment” ratings and evaluation data. (iii) The internal structure was assessed by exploratory factor analysis, and inter-rater reliability by generalisability analysis. Data were collected during two runs of MSF, in which 47 residents were evaluated once (first run) or several times (second and third run) on 81 occasions of MSF. (iv) To investigate consequences, we analysed the residents’ learning goals and the progress as reported via MSF. RESULTS: Our resulting MSF questionnaire (MSF-RG) consists of 15 items and one global rating, which are each rated on a scale and accompanied by a field for narrative comments and cover a construct of a physician’s competence. Additionally, there are five open questions for further suggestions. Investigation of validity evidence revealed that: (i) The expert group agreed that the content comprehensively addresses clinical competence; (ii) The response processes indicated that the questions are understood as intended and supported the acceptance and usability; (iii) For the second run, factor analysis showed a one-factor solution, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.951 and an inter-rater reliability of 0.797 with 12 raters; (iv) There are indications that residents benefitted, considering their individual learning goals and based on their ratings reported via MSF itself. CONCLUSIONS: To support residency training with multisource feedback, we developed a German MSF questionnaire (MSF-RG), which is supported by four sources of validity evidence. This MSF questionnaire may be useful to implement MSF in residency training in German-speaking regions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7552497
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75524972020-10-13 A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence Hennel, Eva K. Subotic, Ulrike Berendonk, Christoph Stricker, Daniel Harendza, Sigrid Huwendiek, Sören BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: In medical settings, multisource feedback (MSF) is a recognised method of formative assessment. It collects feedback on a doctor’s performance from several perspectives in the form of questionnaires. Yet, no validated MSF questionnaire has been publicly available in German. Thus, we aimed to develop a German MSF questionnaire based on the CanMEDS roles and to investigate the evidence of its validity. METHODS: We developed a competency-based MSF questionnaire in German, informed by the literature and expert input. Four sources of validity evidence were investigated: (i) Content was examined based on MSF literature, blueprints of competency, and expert-team discussions. (ii) The response process was supported by analysis of a think-aloud study, narrative comments, “unable to comment” ratings and evaluation data. (iii) The internal structure was assessed by exploratory factor analysis, and inter-rater reliability by generalisability analysis. Data were collected during two runs of MSF, in which 47 residents were evaluated once (first run) or several times (second and third run) on 81 occasions of MSF. (iv) To investigate consequences, we analysed the residents’ learning goals and the progress as reported via MSF. RESULTS: Our resulting MSF questionnaire (MSF-RG) consists of 15 items and one global rating, which are each rated on a scale and accompanied by a field for narrative comments and cover a construct of a physician’s competence. Additionally, there are five open questions for further suggestions. Investigation of validity evidence revealed that: (i) The expert group agreed that the content comprehensively addresses clinical competence; (ii) The response processes indicated that the questions are understood as intended and supported the acceptance and usability; (iii) For the second run, factor analysis showed a one-factor solution, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.951 and an inter-rater reliability of 0.797 with 12 raters; (iv) There are indications that residents benefitted, considering their individual learning goals and based on their ratings reported via MSF itself. CONCLUSIONS: To support residency training with multisource feedback, we developed a German MSF questionnaire (MSF-RG), which is supported by four sources of validity evidence. This MSF questionnaire may be useful to implement MSF in residency training in German-speaking regions. BioMed Central 2020-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7552497/ /pubmed/33046060 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02259-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hennel, Eva K.
Subotic, Ulrike
Berendonk, Christoph
Stricker, Daniel
Harendza, Sigrid
Huwendiek, Sören
A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
title A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
title_full A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
title_fullStr A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
title_full_unstemmed A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
title_short A german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
title_sort german-language competency-based multisource feedback instrument for residents: development and validity evidence
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7552497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33046060
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02259-2
work_keys_str_mv AT hennelevak agermanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT suboticulrike agermanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT berendonkchristoph agermanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT strickerdaniel agermanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT harendzasigrid agermanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT huwendieksoren agermanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT hennelevak germanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT suboticulrike germanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT berendonkchristoph germanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT strickerdaniel germanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT harendzasigrid germanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence
AT huwendieksoren germanlanguagecompetencybasedmultisourcefeedbackinstrumentforresidentsdevelopmentandvalidityevidence