Advanced search
Publication Cover
Medical Teacher Volume 43, 2021 - Issue 5
Submit an article Journal homepage
352
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Articles

A prediction-based method to estimate student learning outcome: Impact of response rate and gender differences on evaluation results

Binia-Laureen Grebenera Department of Cardiology and Pneumology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, GermanyView further author information
,
Janina Barthb Division of Medical Education Research and Curriculum Development, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, GermanyORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1905-1257View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Sven Andersc Department of Legal Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, GermanyORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1268-5022View further author information
ORCID Icon,
Tim Beißbarthd Department of Medical Bioinformatics, University Medical Center Göttingen, Göttingen, GermanyORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6509-2143View further author information
ORCID Icon &
Tobias Raupacha Department of Cardiology and Pneumology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany;e Department of Medical Education, Bonn University Medical Centre, Bonn, GermanyCorrespondence[email protected]
ORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2555-8097View further author information
ORCID Icon
Pages 524-530 | Published online: 27 Jan 2021

References

  • Blanch-Hartigan D. 2011. Medical students' self-assessment of performance: results from three meta-analyses. Patient Educ Couns. 84(1):3–9.
  • Cohen J. 1992. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 112(1):155–159.
  • Cohen-Schotanus J, Schonrock-Adema J, Schmidt HG. 2010. Quality of courses evaluated by 'predictions' rather than opinions: Fewer respondents needed for similar results. Med Teach. 32(10):851–856.
  • Cook NR. 2007. Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction. Circulation. 115(7):928–935.
  • Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis M, VAN Harrison R, Thorpe KE, Perrier L. 2006. Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: a systematic review. JAMA. 296(9):1094–1102.
  • Fitzgerald JT, White CB, Gruppen LD. 2003. A longitudinal study of self-assessment accuracy. Med Educ. 37(7):645–649.
  • Fluit CR, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Laan R, Wensing M. 2010. Assessing the quality of clinical teachers: a systematic review of content and quality of questionnaires for assessing clinical teachers. J Gen Intern Med. 25(12):1337–1345.
  • Frisbie DA. 2005. The multiple true‐false item format: a status review. Educ Meas. 11(4):21–26.
  • Germain M, Scandura TA. 2005. Grade inflation and student individual differences as systematic bias in faculty evaluations. J Instruct Psychol. 32:58–67.
  • Gibson KA, Boyle P, Black DA, Cunningham M, Grimm MC, Mcneil HP. 2008. Enhancing evaluation in an Undergraduate Medical Education Program. Acad Med. 83(8):787–793.
  • Goldie J. 2006. AMEE Education Guide no. 29: evaluating educational programmes. Med Teach. 28(3):210–224.
  • Hanley JA, Mcneil BJ. 1982. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology. 143(1):29–36.
  • Hofstee WKB, Schaapman H. 1990. Bets beat polls: averaged predictions of election outcomes. Acta Politic. 25:257–270.
  • Lundquist LM, Shogbon AO, Momary KM, Rogers HK. 2013. A comparison of students' self-assessments with faculty evaluations of their communication skills. Am J Pharm Educ. 77(4):72.
  • Madrazo L, Lee CB, Mcconnell M, Khamisa K. 2018. Self-assessment differences between genders in a low-stakes objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). BMC Res Notes. 11(1):393.
  • Minter RM, Gruppen LD, Napolitano KS, Gauger PG. 2005. Gender differences in the self-assessment of surgical residents. Am J Surg. 189(6):647–650.
  • O’Rourke T. 1999. Increasing response rates: Specific applications. Am J Health Stud. 15:164–166.
  • Papinczak T, Young L, Groves M, Haynes M. 2007. An analysis of peer, self, and tutor assessment in problem-based learning tutorials. Med Teach. 29(5):e122–e132.
  • Prave RS, Baril GL. 1993. Instructor ratings: Controlling for bias from Initial student interest. J Educ Bus. 68:362–366.
  • Raupach T, Munscher C, Beissbarth T, Burckhardt G, Pukrop T. 2011. Towards outcome-based programme evaluation: using student comparative self-assessments to determine teaching effectiveness. Med Teach. 33(8):e446–e453.
  • Raupach T, Schiekirka S, Münscher C, Beißbarth T, Himmel W, Burckhardt G, Pukrop T. 2012. Piloting an outcome-based programme evaluation tool in undergraduate medical education. GMS Z Med Ausbild. 29(3):Doc44.
  • Schiekirka S, Anders S, Raupach T. 2014. Assessment of two different types of bias affecting the results of outcome-based evaluation in undergraduate medical education. BMC Med Educ. 14:149.
  • Schiekirka S, Raupach T. 2015. A systematic review of factors influencing student ratings in undergraduate medical education course evaluations. BMC Med Educ. 15:30.
  • Schiekirka S, Reinhardt D, Beibarth T, Anders S, Pukrop T, Raupach T. 2013. Estimating learning outcomes from pre- and posttest student self-assessments: a longitudinal study. Acad Med. 88(3):369–375.
  • Schonrock-Adema J, Lubarsky S, Chalk C, Steinert Y, Cohen-Schotanus J. 2013. What would my classmates say? An international study of the prediction-based method of course evaluation. Med Educ. 47:453–462.
  • Spoto-Cannons AC, Isom DM, Feldman M, Zwygart KK, Mhaskar R, Greenberg MR. 2019. Differences in medical student self-evaluations of clinical and professional skills. AMEP. 10:835–840.
  • Vangeest JB, Johnson TP, Welch VL. 2007. Methodologies for improving response rates in surveys of physicians: a systematic review. Eval Health Prof. 30(4):303–321.
  • Wagner ML, Suh DC, Cruz S. 2011. Peer- and self-grading compared to faculty grading. Am J Pharm Educ. 75(7):130.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.