Evaluation and feedback for effective clinical teaching in postgraduate medical education: Validation of an assessment instrument incorporating the CanMEDS roles

References

• Afonso NM, Cardozo LJ, Mascarenhas OA, Aranha AN, Shah C. Are anonymous evaluations a better assessment of faculty teaching performance? A comparative analysis of open and anonymous evaluation processes. Fam Med 2005; 37(1)43–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auewarakul C, Downing SM, Jaturatamrong U, Praditsuwan R. Sources of validity evidence for an internal medicine student evaluation system: An evaluative study of assessment methods. Med Educ 2005; 39(3)276–283
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beckman TJ. How reliable are assessments of clinical teaching? A review of the published instruments. J Gen Int Med 2004; 19(9)971–977
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psych Bulletin 1990; 107(2)238–246
   Google Scholar
• Boerboom TB, Dolmans DH, Jaarsma AD, Muijtjens AM, Van Beukelen P, Scherpbier AJ. Exploring the validity and reliability of a questionnaire for evaluating veterinary clinical teachers’ supervisory skills during clinical rotations. Med Teach 2011; 33(2)e84–e91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolhuis S. Professional development between teachers’ practical knowledge and external demands: Plea for a broad socail-constructivist and critical approach. Competence oriented teacher training. Old research demands and new pathways, FK Oser, F Achtenwagen, U Renold. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam/Tapei 2006; 237–249
   Google Scholar
• Boor K, Scheele F, van der Vleuten CPM, Scherpbier AJJA, Teunissen PW, Sijtsma K. Psychometric properties of an instrument to measure the clinical learning environment. Med Educ 2007; 41(1)92–99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browne PM, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Testin structural equation models, JS Long. Sage, Newbury Park, CA 1993; 136–162
   Google Scholar
• Burchell B, Marsh C. The effect of questionniare length on survey response. Qual Quan 1992; 26: 233–244
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheetham G, Chivers G. How professionals learn: An investigation of informal learning amongst people working in professions. J Eur Ind Train 2001; 25(5)248–292
   Google Scholar
• De Villiers MR, De Villiers PJ, Kent AP. The Delphi technique in health sciences education research. Med Teach 2005; 27(7)639–643
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen HA, Gerver WJ, De Grave W, Scherpbier AJ. Providing physicians with feedback on how they supervise students during patient contacts. Med Teach 2004; 26(5)409–414
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dornan T, Boshuizen H, King N, Scherpbier A. Experience-based learning: A model linking the processes and outcomes of medical students’ workplace learning. Med Educ 2007; 41(1)84–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing SM. Validity: On meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ 2003; 37(9)830–837
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Downing SM, Haladyna TM. Validity threats: Overcoming interference with proposed interpretations of assessment data. Med Educ 2004; 38(3)327–333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fluit CR, Bolhuis S, Grol R, Laan R, Wensing M. Assessing the quality of clinical teachers: A systematic review of content and quality of questionnaires for assessing clinical teachers. J Gen Int Med 2010; 25(12)137–145
   Google Scholar
• Frank JR, Danoff D. The CanMEDS initiative: Implementing an outcomes-based framework of physician competencies. Med Teach 2007; 29(7)642–647
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hattie J, Timperley H. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res 2007; 77: 81–112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iglesias C, Torgerson D. Does length of questionnaire matter? A randomised trial of response rates to a mailed questionnaire. J Health Serv Res Policy 2000; 5(4)219–221
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leach DC. Changing education to improve patient care. Qual Health Care 2001; 10(Suppl. 2)ii54–ii58
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Leach DC, Philibert I. High-quality learning for high-quality health care: Getting it right. JAMA 2006; 296(9)1132–1134
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user's guide. Muthén and Muthén, Los Angeles, CA 2004; 3
   Google Scholar
• Norcini J, Burch V. Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31. Med Teach 2007; 29(9)855–871
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheele F, Teunissen P, Luijk van S, Heineman E, Fluit L, Mulder H. Introducing competency-based postgraduate medical education in the Netherlands. Med Teach 2008; 30(3)248–253
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith CA, Varkey AB, Evans AT, Reilly BM. Evaluating the performance of inpatient attending physicians: A new instrument for today's teaching hospitals. J Gen Int Med 2004; 19(7)766–771
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Snell L, Tallett S, Haist S, Hays R, Norcini J, Prince K. A review of the evaluation of clinical teaching: New perspectives and challenges. Med Educ 2000; 34(10)862–870
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stalmeijer RE, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, Muijtjens AM, Scherpbier AJ. The development of an instrument for evaluating clinical teachers: Involving stakeholders to determine content validity. Med Teach 2008; 30(8)e272–e277
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stalmeijer RE, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, Muijtjens AM, Scherpbier AJ. The Maastricht Clinical Teaching Questionnaire (MCTQ) as a valid and reliable instrument for the evaluation of clinical teachers. Acad Med 2010; 85(11)1732–1738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stalmeijer RE, Dolmans DH, Wolfhagen IH, Scherpbier AJ. Cognitive apprenticeship in clinical practice: Can it stimulate learning in the opinion of students?. Adv Health Sci Educ 2009; 14(4)535–546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales3rd. Oxford University Press, New York 2003
   Google Scholar
• Subar AF, Ziegler RG, Thompson FE, Johnson CC, Weissfeld JL, Reding D, Kavounis KH, Hayes RB, Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial Investigators. Is shorter always better? Relative importance of questionnaire length and cognitive ease on response rates and data quality for two dietary questionnaires. Am J Epidemiol 2001; 153(4)404–409
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Teunissen PW, Scheele F, Scherpbier AJ, van der V, Boor K, van Luijk SJ. How residents learn: Qualitative evidence for the pivotal role of clinical activities. Med Educ 2007; 41(8)763–770
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar