Hospital consultants and workplace based assessments: how foundation doctors view these educational interactions?

McKavanagh, Peter; Smyth, Aimée Watt; Carragher, Angela M.

doi:10.1136/postgradmedj-2011-130121

Cited by 18 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Firstly, all three perspectives require assessors to actually observe trainees interacting with patients and all recognise that the current quantity and frequency of observation‐based assessment of undergraduate and postgraduate medical trainees is less than ideal. This is a serious deficiency in assessment programmes, which requires immediate attention . Regardless of the perspective on assessor cognition, institutions must create clinical and medical education systems that permit, promote and sustain direct observation of trainees.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing the ‘black box’ differently: assessor cognition from three research perspectives

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although each of the perspectives discussed in this paper advances our understanding of assessor cognition and its impact on WBA, every perspective has its limitations. Following a discussion of areas of concordance and discordance across the perspectives, we propose a coexistent view in which researchers and practitioners utilise aspects of all three perspectives with the goal of advancing assessment quality and ultimately improving patient care.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seeing the ‘black box’ differently: assessor cognition from three research perspectives

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large majority felt that incompetent trainees could achieve satisfactory results from the WBPAs, while a large percentage of FY doctors felt that the regulatory process did not give them an adequate opportunity to highlight any training problems. This adds weight to the argument that the current WBPA process appears to lack integrity 22 and that WBPAs should not be relied upon to certify competence. 21 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foundation doctors’ experience of their training: a questionnaire study

Dean

Duggleby

2013

JRSM Short Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesWe set out to evaluate the impact of Foundation Year (FY) training on the doctors who had been through this training system.DesignDoctors in training were surveyed using a structured web-based questionnaire.SettingPostgraduate training in the UK has been the subject of much upheaval in recent years.ParticipantsA total of 1065 doctors in training were surveyed in late 2011 and early 2012, of which 638 were current FY doctors.Main outcome measuresThe survey was both quantitative and qualitative, focusing on selection, working hours, training quality, training assessments and the regulation of training.ResultsA majority of current FY trainees worked extra weekly hours with the breakdown being: 5–10 hrs (54%), 10–15 hrs (17%), >15 hrs (9%) and no extra weekly hours (20%). All current FY trainees wanted to work for more than 40 h a week with the following breakdown of desired hours: per week 40–48 (22%), 48–60 (50%) and 60–70 h (19%). The average hours per week spent clerking emergency admissions by current FY trainees were as follows: zero hours (11%), 0–5 h (37%), 5–10 h (30%), 10–15 h (11%) and greater (11%).A large majority (90%) felt that it was possible for incompetent trainees to obtain satisfactory results from assessments and that the FY training program was poor at identifying failing trainees. There were high levels of dissatisfaction with the selection process.ConclusionsFY training appears to be failing in several key areas with the lack of emergency exposure a particular area of concern. It is essential that any future reforms of training address these problem areas.

show abstract

“…These concerns reflect criticisms of workplace‐based assessment in Australia and abroad . Both junior doctors and assessing consultants have reported a lack of time and interest in the process, resulting in grades that are arbitrary, unreliable and lacking in specific feedback . Quantitative studies have demonstrated significant skewing towards positive results and a failure to identify junior doctors at risk of difficulty …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%