...
首页> 外文期刊>Sri Lanka Journal of Psychiatry >The validity of oral assessment (viva) that assesses specific and unique competencies in a post-graduate psychiatry examination
【24h】

The validity of oral assessment (viva) that assesses specific and unique competencies in a post-graduate psychiatry examination

机译:在研究生精神病学检查中评估特定和独特能力的口头评估(viva)的有效性

获取原文
           

摘要

Background Studies have criticized oral assessments for having poor validity and reliability. There is limited research on structured oral assessments that assess specific competencies. Aims To evaluate the validity of the oral assessment component of a postgraduate psychiatry examination. Methods A retrospective analysis of the examination scores of 154 candidates from 12 postgraduate psychiatry examinations conducted during an 8 year period was carried out. Concurrent and construct validity was examined by correlating marks at the viva with the marks of theory, clinical long case and clinical short case components of the candidates. Separate multiple regression analyses were conducted to predict the scores of the different components of the examination. Results Repeated measure ANOVA showed there was no significant difference in the means between the different components of the examination (F=0.49, p=0.486). The viva was a sensitive method of assessment (79/88 =89.7%) but the specificity was low (36/66 =54.5%). Positive predictive value was 72.5% and the negative predictive value was 80.0%. Logistic regression analysis showed that the odds of passing the viva and passing the examination compared with passing the viva and failing the exam was 10.53 (95% CI 4.54- 24.47). There was a statistically significant, moderately high correlation between viva and theory components (r=.50 p<0.001). Multiple regression models showed that viva marks were a predictor of performance at the clinical short case and theory components but not the clinical long case. Conclusion Viva had good sensitivity and positive and negative predictive values. Instead of discontinuing the use of oral assessments, ways should be identified to improve the reliability and validity of the oral assessment. Sri Lanka Journal of Psychiatry Vol 3(2) December 2012 Page 16-19 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/sljpsyc.v3i2.5133
机译:背景研究批评口头评估的有效性和可靠性差。关于评估特定能力的结构化口头评估的研究很少。目的评估研究生精神病学检查的口头评估成分的有效性。方法回顾性分析在8年期间进行的12次研究生精神病学考试中154名候选人的考试成绩。通过将候选者的标记与理论标记,临床长期病例和临床短期病例组成部分相关联,来检验并行性和构建体有效性。进行了单独的多元回归分析,以预测考试不同组成部分的得分。结果重复测量的方差分析表明,在检查的不同组成部分之间的均值没有显着差异(F = 0.49,p = 0.486)。活体是一种敏感的评估方法(79/88 = 89.7%),但特异性低(36/66 = 54.5%)。阳性预测值为72.5%,阴性预测值为80.0%。 Logistic回归分析显示,通过和通过考试与通过和通过考试不及格的几率是10.53(95%CI 4.54-24.47)。在活力与理论成分之间存在统计学上显着的,较高的相关性(r = .50 p <0.001)。多元回归模型显示,活体标记是临床短期病例和理论组成部分表现的预测指标,而非临床长期病例。结论Viva具有良好的敏感性,并具有阳性和阴性预测值。不应停止使用口头评估,而应确定提高口头评估的可靠性和有效性的方法。斯里兰卡精神病学杂志2012年12月,第3(2)期第16-19页DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.4038/sljpsyc.v3i2.5133

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号