Comparing the importance of clinical competence criteria across specialties: impact on undergraduate assessment

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/29799
Title:
Comparing the importance of clinical competence criteria across specialties: impact on undergraduate assessment
Authors:
Cross, Vinette; Hicks, Carolyn; Barwell, Fred
Abstract:
Quality measurement in healthcare and higher education indicates the need for a systematic approach to developing undergraduate clinical competence assessment. Validity and reliability may be undermined by differences in assessors' interpretation of what is important. Differing contexts of undergraduates' clinical experience could result in assessors' ratings of activities being deemed less important, omitted or rendered meaningless. This study investigated the level of agreement across and within five clinical specialties in physiotherapy on the relative importance of 89 activities associated with clinical competence. One-way analysis of variance for each activity revealed 12 items differentially rated (p values = 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001). Kendall's coefficient of concordance demonstrated within-group agreement (p = < 0.000). Factor analysis of items upon which there was maximum agreement across specialties, combined with split half reliability analysis (Cronbach's alpha) resulted in eight reliable factors. These included task-specific and generic transferable skills. It was concluded that the factors provided a basis for discussion about clinicians' and academics' contributions to assessment, and a starting point for development of a clinical assessment instrument that could optimise the validity and reliability of clinical assessment decisions.
Citation:
Physiotherapy, 87 (7): 351-367
Publisher:
Elsevier
Journal:
Physiotherapy
Issue Date:
2001
URI:
http://hdl.handle.net/2436/29799
DOI:
10.1016/S0031-9406(05)60867-X
Additional Links:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7CVK-4H9YR37-3&_user=1644469&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F2001&_rdoc=3&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%2318081%232001%23999129992%23608016%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=18081&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=19&_acct=C000054077&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1644469&md5=c759d4f0e2c60b2a095f06fd86efd755
Type:
Article
Language:
en
Appears in Collections:
Centre for Health and Social Care Improvement

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorCross, Vinette-
dc.contributor.authorHicks, Carolyn-
dc.contributor.authorBarwell, Fred-
dc.date.accessioned2008-06-10T14:31:15Z-
dc.date.available2008-06-10T14:31:15Z-
dc.date.issued2001-
dc.identifier.citationPhysiotherapy, 87 (7): 351-367en
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0031-9406(05)60867-X-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2436/29799-
dc.description.abstractQuality measurement in healthcare and higher education indicates the need for a systematic approach to developing undergraduate clinical competence assessment. Validity and reliability may be undermined by differences in assessors' interpretation of what is important. Differing contexts of undergraduates' clinical experience could result in assessors' ratings of activities being deemed less important, omitted or rendered meaningless. This study investigated the level of agreement across and within five clinical specialties in physiotherapy on the relative importance of 89 activities associated with clinical competence. One-way analysis of variance for each activity revealed 12 items differentially rated (p values = 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001). Kendall's coefficient of concordance demonstrated within-group agreement (p = < 0.000). Factor analysis of items upon which there was maximum agreement across specialties, combined with split half reliability analysis (Cronbach's alpha) resulted in eight reliable factors. These included task-specific and generic transferable skills. It was concluded that the factors provided a basis for discussion about clinicians' and academics' contributions to assessment, and a starting point for development of a clinical assessment instrument that could optimise the validity and reliability of clinical assessment decisions.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B7CVK-4H9YR37-3&_user=1644469&_coverDate=07%2F31%2F2001&_rdoc=3&_fmt=high&_orig=browse&_srch=doc-info(%23toc%2318081%232001%23999129992%23608016%23FLA%23display%23Volume)&_cdi=18081&_sort=d&_docanchor=&_ct=19&_acct=C000054077&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=1644469&md5=c759d4f0e2c60b2a095f06fd86efd755en
dc.subjectClinical Assessmenten
dc.subjectCompetenceen
dc.subjectPhysiotherapyen
dc.titleComparing the importance of clinical competence criteria across specialties: impact on undergraduate assessmenten
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.journalPhysiotherapyen
All Items in WIRE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.