Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Aggregated student confidence estimates support continuous quality improvements in a competencies-oriented curriculum
  1. Frank Joseph Papa,
  2. Jerry H Alexander
  1. Medical Education, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Frank Joseph Papa; frank.papa{at}unthsc.edu

Abstract

Introduction Competencies oriented medical curricula are intended to support the development of those specific tasks likely to improve patient care outcomes. In 2005, our institution developed curricular objectives and instructional activities intended to enable our students to competently perform four specific clinical tasks (diagnose, treat, manage and explain phenomena) for each of approximately 100 common and/or important patient presentations (eg, dyspnoea). However, competencies oriented curricula must also develop outcome metrics aligned with their objectives and instructional activities in order to launch a continuous quality improvement (CQI) programme. This investigation describes how a novel course evaluation methodology produced presentation and task-focused outcome metrics sufficient to support CQIs in our competencies-oriented curriculum.

Methods Literature suggests that aggregated, group opinions are much more reliable than individual opinions in a variety of settings, including education. In 2010, we launched a course evaluation methodology using aggregated student self-assessments of their confidence in performing the four tasks trained to in each presentation-focused instructional activity. These aggregated estimates were transformed into a variety of graphic and tabular reports which faculty used to identify, and then remediate, those specific instructional activities associated with suboptimal presentation and task-focused confidence metrics.

Results With academic year 2010–2011 serving as a baseline and academic year 2015–2016 as an endpoint, analysis of variance revealed a sustained and statistically significant gain in student confidence across this 6-year study period (p<0.001).

Discussion This investigation demonstrated that aggregated, presentation and task-specific confidence estimates enabled faculty to pursue and attain CQIs in a competencies-oriented curriculum. Suggestions for new approaches to confidence-related research are offered.

  • continuous quality improvement
  • evaluation methodology
  • medical education
  • quality improvement methodologies

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors FJP was the primary author of the principles underlying the development of the presentation-focused, task-specific competencies-oriented curriculum and the course evaluation metrics described herein. JHA established the basis for increasingly granular course evaluation metrics and their use as formative feedback for launching curricular CQI programming. JHA was also responsible for handling and analysing the data described herein. Both contributed equally to the initial drafting and multiple revisions of the manuscript.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Ethics approval Ethical approval has been granted by University of North Texas Health Science Center, Office for the Protection of Human Subjects, protocol number 2012-024, annually updated.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Data sharing statement No additional data are available.