Factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores among general internists and cardiologists

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Context: We are unaware of studies examining the stability of teaching assessment scores across different medical specialties. A recent study showed that clinical teaching assessments of general internists reduced to interpersonal, clinical teaching and efficiency domains. We sought to determine the factor stability of this 3-dimensional model among cardiologists and to compare domain-specific scores between general internists and cardiologists. Methods: A total of 2000 general internal medicine and cardiology hospital teaching assessments carried out from January 2000 to March 2004 were analysed using principal factor analysis. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were calculated. Mean item scores were compared between general internists and cardiologists. Results: The interpersonal and clinical teaching domains previously demonstrated among general internists collapsed into 1 domain among cardiologists, whereas the efficiency domain remained stable. Internal consistency of domains (Cronbach's alpha range 0.89-0.93) and inter-rater reliability of items (range 0.65-0.87) were good to excellent for both specialties. General internists scored significantly higher (P < 0.05) than cardiologists on most items except for 4 items that more accurately assessed the cardiology teaching environment. Conclusions: We observed factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores from the same instrument administered to general internists and cardiologists. This finding was attributed to salient differences between these specialties' educational environments and highlights the importance of validating assessments for the specific contexts in which they are to be used. Future research should determine whether interpersonal domain scores identify superior teachers and study the reasons why interpersonal and clinical teaching domains are unstable across different educational settings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1209-1216
Number of pages8
JournalMedical Education
Volume40
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2006

Fingerprint

Teaching
assessment of teaching
Cardiology
efficiency
educational setting
Internal Medicine
Cardiologists
factor analysis
Teaching Hospitals
Statistical Factor Analysis
medicine
Medicine
teacher

Keywords

  • *Internship and residency
  • Cardiology/*education
  • Factor analysis, statistical
  • Minnesota
  • Observer variation
  • Teaching/*standards/methods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Nursing(all)
  • Education

Cite this

Factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores among general internists and cardiologists. / Beckman, Thomas J.; Cook, David Allan; Mandrekar, Jayawant.

In: Medical Education, Vol. 40, No. 12, 12.2006, p. 1209-1216.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9cef075a8a0b4bf78c8e855f18644d41,
title = "Factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores among general internists and cardiologists",
abstract = "Context: We are unaware of studies examining the stability of teaching assessment scores across different medical specialties. A recent study showed that clinical teaching assessments of general internists reduced to interpersonal, clinical teaching and efficiency domains. We sought to determine the factor stability of this 3-dimensional model among cardiologists and to compare domain-specific scores between general internists and cardiologists. Methods: A total of 2000 general internal medicine and cardiology hospital teaching assessments carried out from January 2000 to March 2004 were analysed using principal factor analysis. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were calculated. Mean item scores were compared between general internists and cardiologists. Results: The interpersonal and clinical teaching domains previously demonstrated among general internists collapsed into 1 domain among cardiologists, whereas the efficiency domain remained stable. Internal consistency of domains (Cronbach's alpha range 0.89-0.93) and inter-rater reliability of items (range 0.65-0.87) were good to excellent for both specialties. General internists scored significantly higher (P < 0.05) than cardiologists on most items except for 4 items that more accurately assessed the cardiology teaching environment. Conclusions: We observed factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores from the same instrument administered to general internists and cardiologists. This finding was attributed to salient differences between these specialties' educational environments and highlights the importance of validating assessments for the specific contexts in which they are to be used. Future research should determine whether interpersonal domain scores identify superior teachers and study the reasons why interpersonal and clinical teaching domains are unstable across different educational settings.",
keywords = "*Internship and residency, Cardiology/*education, Factor analysis, statistical, Minnesota, Observer variation, Teaching/*standards/methods",
author = "Beckman, {Thomas J.} and Cook, {David Allan} and Jayawant Mandrekar",
year = "2006",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02632.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "40",
pages = "1209--1216",
journal = "Medical Education",
issn = "0308-0110",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores among general internists and cardiologists

AU - Beckman, Thomas J.

AU - Cook, David Allan

AU - Mandrekar, Jayawant

PY - 2006/12

Y1 - 2006/12

N2 - Context: We are unaware of studies examining the stability of teaching assessment scores across different medical specialties. A recent study showed that clinical teaching assessments of general internists reduced to interpersonal, clinical teaching and efficiency domains. We sought to determine the factor stability of this 3-dimensional model among cardiologists and to compare domain-specific scores between general internists and cardiologists. Methods: A total of 2000 general internal medicine and cardiology hospital teaching assessments carried out from January 2000 to March 2004 were analysed using principal factor analysis. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were calculated. Mean item scores were compared between general internists and cardiologists. Results: The interpersonal and clinical teaching domains previously demonstrated among general internists collapsed into 1 domain among cardiologists, whereas the efficiency domain remained stable. Internal consistency of domains (Cronbach's alpha range 0.89-0.93) and inter-rater reliability of items (range 0.65-0.87) were good to excellent for both specialties. General internists scored significantly higher (P < 0.05) than cardiologists on most items except for 4 items that more accurately assessed the cardiology teaching environment. Conclusions: We observed factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores from the same instrument administered to general internists and cardiologists. This finding was attributed to salient differences between these specialties' educational environments and highlights the importance of validating assessments for the specific contexts in which they are to be used. Future research should determine whether interpersonal domain scores identify superior teachers and study the reasons why interpersonal and clinical teaching domains are unstable across different educational settings.

AB - Context: We are unaware of studies examining the stability of teaching assessment scores across different medical specialties. A recent study showed that clinical teaching assessments of general internists reduced to interpersonal, clinical teaching and efficiency domains. We sought to determine the factor stability of this 3-dimensional model among cardiologists and to compare domain-specific scores between general internists and cardiologists. Methods: A total of 2000 general internal medicine and cardiology hospital teaching assessments carried out from January 2000 to March 2004 were analysed using principal factor analysis. Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability were calculated. Mean item scores were compared between general internists and cardiologists. Results: The interpersonal and clinical teaching domains previously demonstrated among general internists collapsed into 1 domain among cardiologists, whereas the efficiency domain remained stable. Internal consistency of domains (Cronbach's alpha range 0.89-0.93) and inter-rater reliability of items (range 0.65-0.87) were good to excellent for both specialties. General internists scored significantly higher (P < 0.05) than cardiologists on most items except for 4 items that more accurately assessed the cardiology teaching environment. Conclusions: We observed factor instability of clinical teaching assessment scores from the same instrument administered to general internists and cardiologists. This finding was attributed to salient differences between these specialties' educational environments and highlights the importance of validating assessments for the specific contexts in which they are to be used. Future research should determine whether interpersonal domain scores identify superior teachers and study the reasons why interpersonal and clinical teaching domains are unstable across different educational settings.

KW - Internship and residency

KW - Cardiology/education

KW - Factor analysis, statistical

KW - Minnesota

KW - Observer variation

KW - Teaching/standards/methods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33751352124&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33751352124&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02632.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02632.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 17118115

AN - SCOPUS:33751352124

VL - 40

SP - 1209

EP - 1216

JO - Medical Education

JF - Medical Education

SN - 0308-0110

IS - 12

ER -