Assessment in Undergraduate Competency-Based Medical Education: A Systematic Review

本科生能力本位医学教育评估:系统性综述

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies that have methodically compiled the body of research on the competency-based medical education (CBME) assessment procedure and pinpointed knowledge gaps about the structure of the assessment process are few. Thus, the goals of the study were to create a model assessment framework for competency-based medical education that would be applicable in the Indian setting as well as to thoroughly examine the competency-based medical education assessment framework. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were the databases that were searched. The search parameters were restricted to English language publications about competency-based education and assessment methods, which were published between January 2006 and December 2020. A descriptive overview of the included research (in tabular form) served as the foundation for the data synthesis. RESULTS: Databases provided 732 records; out of which 36 fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Thirty-six studies comprised a mix of randomized controlled trials, focus group interviews, and questionnaire studies, including cross-sectional studies, qualitative studies (03), mixed-method studies, etc. The papers were published in 10 different journals. The greatest number was published in BMC Medical Education (18). The average quality score for included studies was 62.53% (range: 35.71-83.33%). Most authors are from the UK (07), followed by the USA (05). The included studies were grouped into seven categories based on their dominant focus: moving away from a behavioristic approach to a constructive approach of assessment (01 studies), formative assessment (FA) and feedback (10 studies), the hurdles in the implementation of feedback (04 studies), utilization of computer or online based formative test with automated feedback (05 studies), video feedback (02 studies), e-learning platforms for formative assessment (04 studies), studies related to workplace-based assessment (WBA)/mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX)/direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) (10 studies). CONCLUSIONS: Various constructivist techniques, such as concept maps, portfolios, and rubrics, can be used for assessments. Self-regulated learning, peer feedback, online formative assessment, an online computer-based formative test with automated feedback, the use of a computerized web-based objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) evaluation system, and the use of narrative feedback instead of numerical scores in mini-CEX are all ways to increase student involvement in the design and implementation of the formative assessment.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。