Objective: To compare the quality of biannual feedback sessions when guided by assessment profiles from the Relative Ranking Feedback (RRF) tool versus a conventional likert scale system.
Study Design: We conducted a cross-sectional comparison of a performance feedback session at the biannual resident review for two residency programs within the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at UT Houston guided by assessment profiles from two different Web-based assessment tools, the RRF tool, and a likert scale evaluation tool. After the sessions, both faculty and resident independently rated their perceived quality of each session using a 10 item five point likert scale. Independent sample proportions were analyzed with chi-squared testing.
Results: Of the 48 resident/faculty pairs, 29 residents (60.4%), and 17 faculty (35.4%) completed the online likert scale. Residents and faculty preferred the RRF tool to generate feedback (63.0%, 64.7%) over the likert scale, but faculty (23.5%) and resident (63.0%) preference differed on the RRF tool for evaluation. Chi squared analysis comparing the preference of residents to that of faculty using the RRF tool to evaluate resident performance reached statistical significance with a p value of 0.01 (OR=5.25, 95% CI 1.2-28), but did not in order to generate feedback, p=0.07 (OR=3.11, 95% CI 0.74-13.5).
Conclusion: The RRF tool was preferred over a likert scale to generate feedback, but faculty preference waned for the RRF tool in evaluation, likely due to time concerns and belief that it was better suited as a semi-annual rather than monthly evaluation tool.
Topics: 2013, Resident, Residency Director, Assessment,
Date Presented
2013 ASL Abstract
Keywords
Assessment, Curriculum Development/Evaluation, Evaluation of Clinical Performance, Feedback & Evaluation, Personal Characteristics/Attitudes
Intended Audience
Resident, Residency Director
Educational Focus
Assessment
Primary Author
Charles Kilpatrick, MD
