2006
DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200608000-00008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of an Objective Scoring System for Measurement of Resident Performance on the Human Patient Simulator

Abstract: The developed scoring tool to measure resident performance of general anesthesia for emergency cesarean delivery on the patient simulator seems both valid and reliable in the context in which it was tested. This scoring system may prove useful for future studies such as those investigating the effect of simulator training on objective assessment of resident performance.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
51
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(53 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
51
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The scenarios were originally developed by the Israeli Board of Anesthesiology Examination Committee. 2,3,12,13 Faculty members from the Department of Anesthesiology at the University of Florida, assisted by education and simulation experts, translated the scenarios and assessment tools, with maximal adherence to the original script, 2,3 scenario protocol, language, and assessment tools. No changes were made in scoring, assessment, pass/fail determinations, orientation of residents, or the examination process itself (see A P P E N D I X E S 1 AND 2 for development and validation).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The scenarios were originally developed by the Israeli Board of Anesthesiology Examination Committee. 2,3,12,13 Faculty members from the Department of Anesthesiology at the University of Florida, assisted by education and simulation experts, translated the scenarios and assessment tools, with maximal adherence to the original script, 2,3 scenario protocol, language, and assessment tools. No changes were made in scoring, assessment, pass/fail determinations, orientation of residents, or the examination process itself (see A P P E N D I X E S 1 AND 2 for development and validation).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Eighteen publications were finally selected. The retained articles were classified according to their main focus as NTSs, 8,14,[20][21][22][23][24] Medical Expert competency, 16,17,[25][26][27][28][29][30] or both. 13,15,31 The assessment tools were classified as checklists and global rating scales (GRS) (Fig.…”
Section: Development Of the Toolmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies included between five and 28 experts in the Delphi process. 8,9,10 We achieved good internal consistency providing a high degree of confidence in our sample size of 10 experts.To address the issue of content validity we aimed to achieve consensus amongst a group of experts using a Delphi process. The concordance achieved was 0.668.…”
mentioning
confidence: 67%