Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorStevens, Sebastian
dc.contributor.authorRead, J
dc.contributor.authorBaines, Rebecca
dc.contributor.authorChatterjee, Arunangsu
dc.contributor.authorArcher, Julian
dc.date.accessioned2018-07-12T11:51:56Z
dc.date.issued2018-10
dc.identifier.issn1554-558X
dc.identifier.issn1554-558X
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/11830
dc.description.abstract

Introduction Over the past ten years, a number of systematic reviews have evaluated the validity of multisource feedback (MSF) to assess and quality assure medical practice. The purpose of this study is to synthesise the results from existing reviews to provide a holistic overview of the validity evidence. Methods This review identified eight systematic reviews evaluating the validity of MSF published between January 2006 and October 2016. Using a standardised data extraction form, two independent reviewers extracted study characteristics. A framework of validation developed by the American Psychological Association (APA) was used to appraise the validity evidence within each systematic review. Results In terms of validity evidence, each of the eight reviews demonstrated evidence across at least one domain of the APA validity framework. Evidence of assessment validity within the domains of ‘internal structure’ and ‘relationship to other variables’ has been well established. However, the domains of content validity (i.e. ensuring MSF tools measure what they are intended to measure); consequential validity (i.e. evidence of the intended or unintended consequences MSF assessments may have on participants or wider society) and response process validity (i.e. the process of standardisation and quality control in the delivery and completion of assessments) remain limited. Discussion Evidence for the validity of MSF has, across a number of domains, been well-established. However, the size and quality of the existing evidence remains variable. In order to determine the extent to which MSF is considered a valid instrument to assess medical performance, future research is required to determine: 1) how best to design and deliver MSF assessments that address the identified limitations of existing tools, and 2) how to ensure involvement within MSF supports positive changes in practice. Such research is integral if MSF is to continue to inform medical performance and subsequent improvements in the quality and safety of patient care.

dc.format.extent262-268
dc.format.mediumPrint
dc.languageen
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins
dc.subjectmultisource feedback
dc.subjectMSF
dc.subjectsystematic review
dc.subjectmedical education
dc.subjectvalidity
dc.subjectphysician
dc.titleValidation of Multisource Feedback in Assessing Medical Performance: A Systematic Review
dc.typejournal-article
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
dc.typeSystematic Review
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000457630800007&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=11bb513d99f797142bcfeffcc58ea008
plymouth.issue4
plymouth.volume38
plymouth.publication-statusPublished
plymouth.journalJournal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/ceh.0000000000000219
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA23 Education
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Users by role/Academics
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-07-09
dc.rights.embargodate2019-10-1
dc.identifier.eissn1554-558X
dc.rights.embargoperiod12 months
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1097/ceh.0000000000000219
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/under-embargo-all-rights-reserved
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-10
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
Atmire NV