Threats to Reliability and Validity With Resident Wellness Surveying Efforts

居民健康调查工作面临的可靠性和有效性威胁

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Residency programs and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) use survey data for the purpose of program evaluation. A priority for many programs is to improve resident wellness, often relying on self-reported surveys to drive interventions. OBJECTIVE: We tested for result differences on wellness surveys collected through varying survey methodology and identified potential causes for differences. METHODS: Aggregated results on the resident wellness scale for a single institution were compared when collected electronically through the ACGME Resident Survey immediately following the program evaluation survey for accreditation purposes and anonymously through an internal survey aimed at program improvement. RESULTS: Across 18 residency programs, 293 of 404 (73%) residents responded to the internal survey, and 383 of 398 residents (96%) responded to the 2018 ACGME survey. There was a significant difference (P < .001, Cohen's d = 1.22) between the composite wellness score from our internal survey (3.69 ± 0.34) compared to its measurement through the ACGME (4.08 ± 0.30), indicating reports of more positive wellness on the national accreditation survey. ACGME results were also statistically more favorable for all 10 individual scale items compared to the internal results. CONCLUSIONS: Potential causes for differences in wellness scores between internal and ACGME collected surveys include poor test-retest reliability, nonresponse bias, coaching responses, social desirability bias, different modes for data collection, and differences in survey response options. Triangulation of data through multiple methodologies and tools may be one approach to accurately gauge resident wellness.

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。