Forecasting residents' performance - Partly cloudy

Reed G. Williams, Gary Dunnington, Debra L. Klamen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The authors offer a practical guide for improving the appraisal of a resident's performance. They identify six major factors that compromise the process of observing, measuring, and characterizing a resident's current performance, forecasting future performance, and making decisions about the resident's progress. Factors that compromise any of these steps lead to individual and collective uncertainty and decrease faculty confidence when making decisions on a resident's progress. The six factors, addressed in order of importance, are inaccuracies due to (1) incomplete sampling of performance, (2) rater memory constraints, (3) hidden performance deficits of the resident, (4) lack of performance benchmarks, (5) faculty members' hesitancy to act on negative performance information, and (6) systematic rater error. The description of each factor is followed by a number of specific suggestions on what residency programs can do to eliminate or minimize the impact of these factors. While this article is couched in the context of the performance evaluation of residents, everything included pertains to measuring and appraising medical students' and practicing physicians' clinical performance as well.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)415-422
Number of pages8
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume80
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Decision Making
resident
Benchmarking
Internship and Residency
Medical Students
Uncertainty
performance
Physicians
compromise
decision making
medical student
deficit
confidence
physician
uncertainty
lack
evaluation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Education

Cite this

Forecasting residents' performance - Partly cloudy. / Williams, Reed G.; Dunnington, Gary; Klamen, Debra L.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 80, No. 5, 05.2005, p. 415-422.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Williams, Reed G. ; Dunnington, Gary ; Klamen, Debra L. / Forecasting residents' performance - Partly cloudy. In: Academic Medicine. 2005 ; Vol. 80, No. 5. pp. 415-422.
@article{c203816e38314ad1a854d75ea72fa5e5,
title = "Forecasting residents' performance - Partly cloudy",
abstract = "The authors offer a practical guide for improving the appraisal of a resident's performance. They identify six major factors that compromise the process of observing, measuring, and characterizing a resident's current performance, forecasting future performance, and making decisions about the resident's progress. Factors that compromise any of these steps lead to individual and collective uncertainty and decrease faculty confidence when making decisions on a resident's progress. The six factors, addressed in order of importance, are inaccuracies due to (1) incomplete sampling of performance, (2) rater memory constraints, (3) hidden performance deficits of the resident, (4) lack of performance benchmarks, (5) faculty members' hesitancy to act on negative performance information, and (6) systematic rater error. The description of each factor is followed by a number of specific suggestions on what residency programs can do to eliminate or minimize the impact of these factors. While this article is couched in the context of the performance evaluation of residents, everything included pertains to measuring and appraising medical students' and practicing physicians' clinical performance as well.",
author = "Williams, {Reed G.} and Gary Dunnington and Klamen, {Debra L.}",
year = "2005",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1097/00001888-200505000-00002",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "80",
pages = "415--422",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Forecasting residents' performance - Partly cloudy

AU - Williams, Reed G.

AU - Dunnington, Gary

AU - Klamen, Debra L.

PY - 2005/5

Y1 - 2005/5

N2 - The authors offer a practical guide for improving the appraisal of a resident's performance. They identify six major factors that compromise the process of observing, measuring, and characterizing a resident's current performance, forecasting future performance, and making decisions about the resident's progress. Factors that compromise any of these steps lead to individual and collective uncertainty and decrease faculty confidence when making decisions on a resident's progress. The six factors, addressed in order of importance, are inaccuracies due to (1) incomplete sampling of performance, (2) rater memory constraints, (3) hidden performance deficits of the resident, (4) lack of performance benchmarks, (5) faculty members' hesitancy to act on negative performance information, and (6) systematic rater error. The description of each factor is followed by a number of specific suggestions on what residency programs can do to eliminate or minimize the impact of these factors. While this article is couched in the context of the performance evaluation of residents, everything included pertains to measuring and appraising medical students' and practicing physicians' clinical performance as well.

AB - The authors offer a practical guide for improving the appraisal of a resident's performance. They identify six major factors that compromise the process of observing, measuring, and characterizing a resident's current performance, forecasting future performance, and making decisions about the resident's progress. Factors that compromise any of these steps lead to individual and collective uncertainty and decrease faculty confidence when making decisions on a resident's progress. The six factors, addressed in order of importance, are inaccuracies due to (1) incomplete sampling of performance, (2) rater memory constraints, (3) hidden performance deficits of the resident, (4) lack of performance benchmarks, (5) faculty members' hesitancy to act on negative performance information, and (6) systematic rater error. The description of each factor is followed by a number of specific suggestions on what residency programs can do to eliminate or minimize the impact of these factors. While this article is couched in the context of the performance evaluation of residents, everything included pertains to measuring and appraising medical students' and practicing physicians' clinical performance as well.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=17844365861&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=17844365861&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00001888-200505000-00002

DO - 10.1097/00001888-200505000-00002

M3 - Article

C2 - 15851450

AN - SCOPUS:17844365861

VL - 80

SP - 415

EP - 422

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 5

ER -