Fairness, Consistency and Bias in the RACS General Surgery Fellowship Examination

皇家外科医师学会普通外科专科医师资格考试的公平性、一致性和偏见

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The General Surgery Fellowship Examination is the final hurdle examination before being eligible for fellowship of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons. The purpose of this study was to assess the consistency and reliability of this examination, specifically whether there was evidence of systemic gender bias. METHODS: This is a retrospective audit of marks awarded in the examination between 2018 and 2022. Examination components were marked separately by two examiners, who assigned a consensus mark after discussion. Candidates' marks were analysed according to their demographics. Inter-observer agreement between examining pairs was analysed, as were marks awarded by individual examiners. RESULTS: Overall, 811 candidates (548 [67%] men and 263 [33%] women) sat the examination, of whom 520 (64%) passed. The pass rate was consistent over the study period. A total of 5672 pairs of examiners' marks were analysed to determine inter-observer agreement. Inter-observer correlation was 0.89 (95% C.I. 0.88-0.89). There were 110 examiners (92 men and 18 women). No examiner's marks were outside the 95% control limit for strictness or leniency compared with their peers. Pass rates were similar for male and female candidates (343/548 [63%] male vs. 177/263 [67%], p = 0.20). There were 102 marking pairs with one female and one male examiner. Inter-rater agreement between these examiners was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82-0.91) when examining men and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.76-0.85) for women. CONCLUSION: We found the examination to be consistent, fair and reliable, with no evidence of systemic gender bias.

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。