The mini-clinical evaluation exercise during medical clerkships: are learning needs and learning goals aligned?

Montagne, Stephanie; Rogausch, Anja; Gemperli, Armin; Berendonk, Christoph; Jucker, Patrick; Beyeler, Christine (2014). The mini-clinical evaluation exercise during medical clerkships: are learning needs and learning goals aligned? Medical education, 48(10), pp. 1008-1019. Wiley 10.1111/medu.12513

[img] Text
medu12513.pdf - Published Version
Restricted to registered users only
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (233kB) | Request a copy

OBJECTIVES The generation of learning goals (LGs) that are aligned with learning needs (LNs) is one of the main purposes of formative workplace-based assessment. In this study, we aimed to analyse how often trainer–student pairs identified corresponding LNs in mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) encounters and to what degree these LNs aligned with recorded LGs, taking into account the social environment (e.g. clinic size) in which the mini-CEX was conducted. METHODS Retrospective analyses of adapted mini-CEX forms (trainers’ and students’ assessments) completed by all Year 4 medical students during clerkships were performed. Learning needs were defined by the lowest score(s) assigned to one or more of the mini-CEX domains. Learning goals were categorised qualitatively according to their correspondence with the six mini-CEX domains (e.g. history taking, professionalism). Following descriptive analyses of LNs and LGs, multi-level logistic regression models were used to predict LGs by identified LNs and social context variables. RESULTS A total of 512 trainers and 165 students conducted 1783 mini-CEXs (98% completion rate). Concordantly, trainer–student pairs most often identified LNs in the domains of ‘clinical reasoning’ (23% of 1167 complete forms), ‘organisation/efficiency’ (20%) and ‘physical examination’ (20%). At least one ‘defined’ LG was noted on 313 student forms (18% of 1710). Of the 446 LGs noted in total, the most frequently noted were ‘physical examination’ (49%) and ‘history taking’ (21%). Corresponding LNs as well as social context factors (e.g. clinic size) were found to be predictors of these LGs. CONCLUSIONS Although trainer–student pairs often agreed in the LNs they identified, many assessments did not result in aligned LGs. The sparseness of LGs, their dependency on social context and their partial non-alignment with students’ LNs raise questions about how the full potential of the mini-CEX as not only a ‘diagnostic’ but also an ‘educational’ tool can be exploited.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Medical Education > Institute for Medical Education
04 Faculty of Medicine > Medical Education > Institute for Medical Education > Assessment and Evaluation Unit (AAE)

UniBE Contributor:

Montagne, Stephanie; Rogausch, Anja; Berendonk, Christoph; Jucker, Patrick and Beyeler, Christine

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health

ISSN:

0308-0110

Publisher:

Wiley

Language:

English

Submitter:

Eveline Götschmann-Meile

Date Deposited:

24 Mar 2015 09:44

Last Modified:

11 May 2017 15:27

Publisher DOI:

10.1111/medu.12513

PubMed ID:

25200021

BORIS DOI:

10.7892/boris.62091

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/62091

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback