2011
DOI: 10.4300/jgme-d-11-00075.1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Primer on the Validity of Assessment Instruments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
221
0
8

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 292 publications
(232 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
(12 reference statements)
3
221
0
8
Order By: Relevance
“…We supported the validity of this tool by defining content, response process, and establishing the tools relationship to other variables, which have been described as important components to this process in the literature. 20 Experts were observed to score consistently higher than non-experts on the checklist, which supports its use as an assessment tool. All experts obtained a checklist score of 9 compared to participants with less experience who only achieved a score of 9 onethird of the time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We supported the validity of this tool by defining content, response process, and establishing the tools relationship to other variables, which have been described as important components to this process in the literature. 20 Experts were observed to score consistently higher than non-experts on the checklist, which supports its use as an assessment tool. All experts obtained a checklist score of 9 compared to participants with less experience who only achieved a score of 9 onethird of the time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 71%
“…Baseline information about previous experience with USGPIV placement in pediatrics and adult patients and level of training was collected via a survey instrument (provided as online supplemental material). Resident participants were divided into 3 skill levels based on their report of previous experience with the following definitions: novice (0-5 USGPIV), intermediate (6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20), and expert (. 20 USGPIV).…”
Section: Checklist Performancementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The examiner /observer bias is mitigated to certain extent here as one student can be assessed by multiple examiners. Reliability means that an assessment consistently achieves the same results with the same or a quite similar cohort of students when administered repeatedly [9]. This can arise in any formative assessment methodologies especially with ambiguous questions.…”
Section: Dinesh Kumar V Gunasegaran Jp Dossier In Anatomy: a Tracmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3 Methods of determining the validity and reliability of a questionnaire are beyond the scope of this article, and you are encouraged to review detailed references on this topic. 6,[9][10][11] Examples of processes for validating questionnaires relating to pharmacy practice that have been implemented in Canada are also available.…”
Section: Before Creating a Survey Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%