Faculty evaluations of resident medical knowledge: can they be used to predict American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination performance?

2015 ◽  
Vol 209 (6) ◽  
pp. 1095-1101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn M. Elfenbein ◽  
Rebecca S. Sippel ◽  
Robert McDonald ◽  
Tammy Watson ◽  
John E. Scarborough ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 000313482110586
Author(s):  
David R Velez

Introduction American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) performance has become an important factor when monitoring resident progress. Understanding which prospective factors predict performance can help identify residents at risk. Methods A literature search was conducted searching PubMed, EMBASE, and JAMA Network from June 2011 to June 2021, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed for the terms “ABSITE” and “American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination.” Prospective factors such as prior examination performance, clinical evaluations, and demographics were evaluated. Results A final 35 studies were included. The prospective factor most consistently found to predict ABSITE performance is performance on prior knowledge-based examinations such as the USMLE step exams. The ACGME Medical Knowledge 1 milestone evaluation also appears to correlate to ABSITE performance, although clinical evaluations, in general, do not. Demographics have no significant correlation to ABSITE performance. Discussion Using performance on prior knowledge-based examinations programs may be able to identify residents at risk for failing ABSITE. It may be possible to initiate early intervention before rather than only remediation after poor performance.



2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dotun Ogunyemi ◽  
Susie Fong ◽  
Geoff Elmore ◽  
Devra Korwin ◽  
Ricardo Azziz

Abstract Objective To assess if the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict MODE Instrument predicts residents’ performance. Study Design Nineteen residents were assessed on the Thomas-Kilmann conflict modes of competing, collaborating, compromising, accommodating, and avoiding. Residents were classified as contributors (n  =  6) if they had administrative duties or as concerning (n  =  6) if they were on remediation for academic performance and/or professionalism. Data were compared to faculty evaluations on the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies. P value of < .05 was considered significant. Results Contributors had significantly higher competing scores (58% versus 17%; P  =  .01), with lower accommodating (50% versus 81%; P 5 .01) and avoiding (32% versus 84%; P  =  .01) scores; while concerning residents had significantly lower collaborating scores (10% versus 31%; P  =  .01), with higher avoiding (90% versus 57%; P  =  .006) and accommodating (86% versus 65%; P  =  .03) scores. There were significant positive correlations between residents’ collaborating scores with faculty ACGME competency evaluations of medical knowledge, communication skills, problem-based learning, system-based practice, and professionalism. There were also positive significant correlations between compromising scores and faculty evaluations of problem-based learning and professionalism with negative significant correlations between avoiding scores and faculty evaluations of problem-based learning, communication skills and professionalism. Conclusions Residents who successfully execute administrative duties are likely to have a Thomas-Kilmann profile high in collaborating and competing but low in avoiding and accommodating. Residents who have problems adjusting are likely to have the opposite profile. The profile seems to predict faculty evaluation on the ACGME competencies.



2003 ◽  
Vol 196 (4) ◽  
pp. 604-609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert S Rhodes ◽  
Thomas W Biesten ◽  
Wallace P Ritchie ◽  
Mark A Malangoni


Surgery ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 152 (4) ◽  
pp. 738-746 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Malangoni ◽  
Andrew T. Jones ◽  
Jonathan Rubright ◽  
Thomas W. Biester ◽  
Jo Buyske ◽  
...  


2017 ◽  
Vol 83 (5) ◽  
pp. 151-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
David H. Ballard ◽  
G. Patton Pennington ◽  
Quyen D. Chu ◽  
Navdeep S. Samra


2016 ◽  
Vol 211 (2) ◽  
pp. 361-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ross E. Willis ◽  
Daniel L. Dent ◽  
Joseph D. Love ◽  
Jason W. Kempenich ◽  
John Uecker ◽  
...  




2018 ◽  
Vol 68 (3) ◽  
pp. e29-e30
Author(s):  
Larry W. Kraiss ◽  
Ragheed Al-Dulaimi ◽  
Angela Presson ◽  
Jack L. Cronenwett ◽  
John F. Eidt ◽  
...  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document