New Methods of Evaluation for Postgraduate Training in Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences (2014)

• Main Authors: Nasrin Jalilian, Reza Pourmirza Kalhori, Nahid Jalilian, Lida Memar Eftekhari
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences 2015-09-01
• Series: Educational Research in Medical Sciences
• Online Access: http://journals.kums.ac.ir/ojs/index.php/EduRMedS/article/view/3227

Revered editor evaluation of medical students in specialized medical fields has great importance in determining the necessary competence to learning clinical environments and necessary ability for functioning in the real environment (1). New specialized medical evaluation focuses on ways that confirm the clinical competence assistant that can point to the students’ experience booklet (log book); assay exams; Multiple Choice Question (MCQ); Objective Structural Clinical Examination (OSCE); observation with check list or rating scale; self-assessment and assessment by peers rating scale general; Portfolio; Direct Observation of Procedure Skill (DOPS); Mini Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX); 360-degree comprehensive assessment of Clinical Skills based on Records assistants (CSR); Objective Structural Practical Examination (OSPE) (2). This descriptive-analytical study was performed to evaluate the use of modern methods of evaluation among eleven postgraduate departments in Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences in 2015. Data collection tool was a checklist that was prepared by researchers and was completed by clinical group managers. Data were analyzed with SPSS-16 software, Chi-square test and analysis of variance. In total of 11 studied groups, 106 full-time board faculty members, 14 co-education, 221 residents were working. The most modern methods to evaluate in %100 of groups were OSCE and MCQ, DOPS in %80 of groups, and Mini-CEX and CSR in% 27 of groups. Assay exams were used in infectious and pathology groups as the use of other modern methods of evaluation was not observed in all groups. Statistically, the most important reasons for the lack of significant new methods of evaluation were: internal decision of the department (P=0.002), unfamiliarity of team members with modern methods of evaluation (P=0.06), and the adequacy of other methods of evaluation according to the decision of the department (P<0.001). Other cited reasons such as lack of necessary accuracy of other methods to evaluate assistants and cost of time and money for the groups were not statistically significant. There is an extended use of the OSCE and MCQ in Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences in evaluating education assistants (3) and evaluation of five-year period of residency MCQ both quantitatively and qualitatively represents designer's assistant to the quality of exam questions in this type of methods (4). But considerable point in this study is lack of attention and unwillingness among faculty members in departments to use other new methods in evaluating the residents. This finding has also been reported in other universities of medical sciences (5), and it is proposed to hold effective and useful workshops to train and change point of views of faculty members about the new methods of evaluation practices.