Reliability and validity of performance evaluations of pain medicine clinical faculty by residents and fellows using a supervision scale

N/ACitations
Citations of this article
12Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Annual and/or semiannual evaluations of pain medicine clinical faculty are mandatory for multiple organizations in the United States. We evaluated the validity and psychometric reliability of a modified version of de Oliveira Filho et al clinical supervision scale for this purpose. METHODS: Six years of weekly evaluations of pain medicine clinical faculty by resident physicians and pain medicine fellows were studied. A 1-4 rating (4 = "Always") was assigned to each of 9 items (eg, "The faculty discussed with me the management of patients before starting a procedure or new therapy and accepted my suggestions, when appropriate"). RESULTS: Cronbach α of the 9 items equaled.975 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.974-0.976). A G coefficient of 0.90 would be expected with 18 raters; the N = 12 six-month periods had mean 18.8 ± 5.9 (standard deviation [SD]) unique raters in each period (median = 20). Concurrent validity was shown by Kendall τb= 0.45 (P <4. There were 3 of 13 ratees with significantly more averages <4 than the other ratees, based on P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dexter, F., Hadlandsmyth, K., Pearson, A. C. S., & Hindman, B. J. (2020). Reliability and validity of performance evaluations of pain medicine clinical faculty by residents and fellows using a supervision scale. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 131(3), 909–916. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000004779

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free