Cargando…

1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance

BACKGROUND: In July 2015, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) jointly outlined an approach to assessing fellow performance using milestone-based core competencies for incorporation into standardized evaluation templates...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dora, Amy V, Vijayan, Tara, Graber, Christopher J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776899/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1324
_version_ 1783630788420435968
author Dora, Amy V
Vijayan, Tara
Graber, Christopher J
author_facet Dora, Amy V
Vijayan, Tara
Graber, Christopher J
author_sort Dora, Amy V
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In July 2015, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) jointly outlined an approach to assessing fellow performance using milestone-based core competencies for incorporation into standardized evaluation templates of trainee performance. Limited data exist regarding the clarity, effectiveness, and reproducibility of competency-based evaluations of infectious diseases fellows. METHODS: From March to May 2019, program directors of ACGME-accredited infectious diseases fellowship programs were invited to complete a Qualtrics-based survey of program characteristics and evaluation methods, including a trainee vignette to gauge evaluation reproducibility. Completed surveys were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Forty-three program directors initiated the survey, but 29 completed it. Seventeen (59%) were men, 19 (66%) were on a teaching service for over 8 weeks a year, and 19 (66%) had fewer than four first year fellows in their program. Most respondents agreed the competencies lacking the most clarity were systems-based practice (17/29, 58%), and practice based improvement (16/29, 55%). Eighteen (62%) were at least “somewhat satisfied” with their institution’s assessment tool, and 19 (66%) reported it was at least “moderately effective” in identifying academic deficiencies. Responses rating fellow performance from the vignette ranged from 1.5 to 4 on the standard milestone-based competency scale of 1-5 with 0.5 increments (median 3). For the same scenario using a qualitative ordinal scale, 66% (19/29) categorized the fellow as “early first year” and 34% (9/29) as “advanced first year.” Respondents offered a wide range of comments on milestone-based competencies, including “it works well enough” and “the process seems bloated and educratic.” CONCLUSION: Clarity is needed on how to evaluate specific core competencies in infectious diseases, particularly systems-based practice and practice-based improvement. Describing anchoring milestones and evaluating fellows in accordance to stage in fellowship (i.e. early first year fellow) can help standardize responses. Further exploration on improving the evaluation process is warranted. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7776899
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77768992021-01-07 1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance Dora, Amy V Vijayan, Tara Graber, Christopher J Open Forum Infect Dis Poster Abstracts BACKGROUND: In July 2015, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) and the American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM) jointly outlined an approach to assessing fellow performance using milestone-based core competencies for incorporation into standardized evaluation templates of trainee performance. Limited data exist regarding the clarity, effectiveness, and reproducibility of competency-based evaluations of infectious diseases fellows. METHODS: From March to May 2019, program directors of ACGME-accredited infectious diseases fellowship programs were invited to complete a Qualtrics-based survey of program characteristics and evaluation methods, including a trainee vignette to gauge evaluation reproducibility. Completed surveys were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Forty-three program directors initiated the survey, but 29 completed it. Seventeen (59%) were men, 19 (66%) were on a teaching service for over 8 weeks a year, and 19 (66%) had fewer than four first year fellows in their program. Most respondents agreed the competencies lacking the most clarity were systems-based practice (17/29, 58%), and practice based improvement (16/29, 55%). Eighteen (62%) were at least “somewhat satisfied” with their institution’s assessment tool, and 19 (66%) reported it was at least “moderately effective” in identifying academic deficiencies. Responses rating fellow performance from the vignette ranged from 1.5 to 4 on the standard milestone-based competency scale of 1-5 with 0.5 increments (median 3). For the same scenario using a qualitative ordinal scale, 66% (19/29) categorized the fellow as “early first year” and 34% (9/29) as “advanced first year.” Respondents offered a wide range of comments on milestone-based competencies, including “it works well enough” and “the process seems bloated and educratic.” CONCLUSION: Clarity is needed on how to evaluate specific core competencies in infectious diseases, particularly systems-based practice and practice-based improvement. Describing anchoring milestones and evaluating fellows in accordance to stage in fellowship (i.e. early first year fellow) can help standardize responses. Further exploration on improving the evaluation process is warranted. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7776899/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1324 Text en © The Author 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Poster Abstracts
Dora, Amy V
Vijayan, Tara
Graber, Christopher J
1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance
title 1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance
title_full 1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance
title_fullStr 1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance
title_full_unstemmed 1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance
title_short 1138. Works Well Enough? Program Directors’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness and Transparency of Competency-Based Evaluations in Assessing Infectious Diseases Fellow Performance
title_sort 1138. works well enough? program directors’ perceptions of the effectiveness and transparency of competency-based evaluations in assessing infectious diseases fellow performance
topic Poster Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776899/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1324
work_keys_str_mv AT doraamyv 1138workswellenoughprogramdirectorsperceptionsoftheeffectivenessandtransparencyofcompetencybasedevaluationsinassessinginfectiousdiseasesfellowperformance
AT vijayantara 1138workswellenoughprogramdirectorsperceptionsoftheeffectivenessandtransparencyofcompetencybasedevaluationsinassessinginfectiousdiseasesfellowperformance
AT graberchristopherj 1138workswellenoughprogramdirectorsperceptionsoftheeffectivenessandtransparencyofcompetencybasedevaluationsinassessinginfectiousdiseasesfellowperformance