LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,225
تعداد مقالات11,164
تعداد مشاهده مقاله77,018,429
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله101,196,635
ARDYANSYAH, BAU DILAM, MASRIAN, MASRIAN, ZAKIAH, ZAKIAH, ISKANDAR, ANDI RATIH, AYUNDI, SITI ADANI, SARTIKA, DWI, RUSTHAM, TENRI PADA. (1404). Bridging the Gaps: Allied Health Practitioners, Clinical Educators, and Peers Perspectives on Resident Performance Assessments. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 13(4), 311-321. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.106145.2148
BAU DILAM ARDYANSYAH; MASRIAN MASRIAN; ZAKIAH ZAKIAH; ANDI RATIH RADIAH ISKANDAR; SITI ADANI AYUNDI; DWI SARTIKA; TENRI PADA RUSTHAM. "Bridging the Gaps: Allied Health Practitioners, Clinical Educators, and Peers Perspectives on Resident Performance Assessments". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 13, 4, 1404, 311-321. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.106145.2148
ARDYANSYAH, BAU DILAM, MASRIAN, MASRIAN, ZAKIAH, ZAKIAH, ISKANDAR, ANDI RATIH, AYUNDI, SITI ADANI, SARTIKA, DWI, RUSTHAM, TENRI PADA. (1404). 'Bridging the Gaps: Allied Health Practitioners, Clinical Educators, and Peers Perspectives on Resident Performance Assessments', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 13(4), pp. 311-321. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.106145.2148
ARDYANSYAH, BAU DILAM, MASRIAN, MASRIAN, ZAKIAH, ZAKIAH, ISKANDAR, ANDI RATIH, AYUNDI, SITI ADANI, SARTIKA, DWI, RUSTHAM, TENRI PADA. Bridging the Gaps: Allied Health Practitioners, Clinical Educators, and Peers Perspectives on Resident Performance Assessments. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1404; 13(4): 311-321. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2025.106145.2148

Bridging the Gaps: Allied Health Practitioners, Clinical Educators, and Peers Perspectives on Resident Performance Assessments

Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism
دوره 13، شماره 4، دی 2025، صفحه 311-321    اصل مقاله (1.41 M)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jamp.2025.106145.2148
نویسندگان
BAU DILAM ARDYANSYAH* 1، 2، 3؛ MASRIAN MASRIAN3؛ ZAKIAH ZAKIAH1؛ ANDI RATIH RADIAH ISKANDAR1، 2؛ SITI ADANI AYUNDI1؛ DWI SARTIKA2، 4؛ TENRI PADA RUSTHAM5، 6
1Department of Medical Education, Medical Faculty of Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
2Health Professions Education Study Program, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
3Hasanuddin University Hospital, Makassar, Indonesia
4Makassar Health Polytechnic, Makassar, Indonesia
5Department of Medical Education, Medical Faculty of Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia.
6Psychology Study Program, Faculty of Medicine, Hasanuddin University, Makassar, Indonesia
چکیده
Introduction: Teaching hospitals integrate healthcare, education, and research but face challenges in assessing residents as learners and healthcare providers. Conventional supervisor-led assessments may not fully capture real-world competencies, necessitating multi-source evaluation. This study examines stakeholder perspectives on resident performance assessment and key evaluation criteria.
Methods: This study employed a qualitative content analysis and inductive approach to examine stakeholder perspectives on residents’ performance. Data were collected through focus group
discussions with purposively sampled clinical educators, allied health practitioners, and senior residents. Transcribed discussions were analysed using inductive thematic analysis in MAXQDA,
following a reflexive six-phase approach. Researchers developed codes, organised them into potential themes, and refined them into a coherent narrative addressing the research questions.
Results: Five themes emerged: Clinical Competency, Learning-Teaching and Mentorship, Professionalism and Ethics, Communication and Teamwork, and Managerial and Administrative Roles. Clinical educators prioritized Learning-Teaching and Mentorship alongside Professionalism, while allied health professionals emphasized Communication and Teamwork, and Managerial and Administrative duties. Residents primarily focused on Learning-Teaching and Mentorship. Subthemes emphasised varied across participant groups.
Conclusion: Teaching hospital stakeholders assess residents differently. Addressing hierarchical barriers, enhancing communication, and fostering professionalism are essential for comprehensive, context-sensitive, and effective resident training and performance assessment.

تازه های تحقیق
کلیدواژه‌ها
Feedback؛ Resident؛ Assessment؛ Professionalism
مراجع
  1. Safarani S, Ravaghi H, Raeissi P, Maleki M. Challenges and Opportunities Faced by Teaching Hospitals in the Perception of Stakeholders and Hospital System Managers. Education in Medicine Journal. 2018;10(4):9-21.
  2. Trotta A, Cardamone E, Cavallaro G, Mauro M. Applying the balanced scorecard approach in teaching hospitals: a literature review and conceptual framework. The International journal of health planning and management. 2013;28(2):181-201.
  3. Mann S, Truelove AH, Beesley T, Howden S, Egan R. Resident perceptions of competency-based medical education. Canadian Medical Education Journal. 2020;11(5):e31.
  4. Rethans JJ, Van Leeuwen Y, Drop R, Van Der Vleuten C, Sturmans F. Competence and performance: two different concepts in the assessment of quality of medical care. Family Practice. 1990;7(3):168-74.
  5. Mulder M, Winterton J. Competence-based vocational and professional education. Cham: Springer; 2017
  6. Ten Cate O, Sargeant J. Multisource feedback for residents: how high must the stakes be? J Grad Med Educ. 2011;3:453-5.
  7. Perez-Villadóniga MJ, Rodriguez-Alvarez A, Roibas D. The contribution of resident physicians to hospital productivity. The European Journal of Health Economics. 2022;23(2):301-12.
  8. Kashner TM, Greenberg PB, Henley SS, Bowman MA, Sanders KM. Assessing physician resident contributions to outpatient clinical workload. Medical Care. 2022;60(9):709-17.
  9. Al Kuwaiti A, Al Muhanna FA. Challenges facing healthcare leadership in attaining accreditation of teaching hospitals. Leadership in Health Services. 2019;32(2):170-81.
  10. Sloan FA. Quality and cost of care by hospital teaching status: what are the differences? The Milbank Quarterly. 2021;99(1):273-327.
  11. Fusch P, Fusch GE, Ness LR. Denzin’s paradigm shift: Revisiting triangulation in qualitative research. Journal of Sustainable Social Change. 2018;10(1):2.
  12. So H, Choi Y, Chan P, Chan AK, Ng GW, Wong GK. Workplace-based assessments: what, why, and how to implement? Hong Kong Med J. 2024;30(3):250-4.
  13. Terwee CB, Prinsen C, Chiarotto A, De Vet H, Bouter LM, Alonso J, et al. COSMIN methodology for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures: a Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1159-70.
  14. Wong RY. The future of competency-based learning and workplace-based assessment in medical and health education. UBC Med J. 2019;10:10-12.
  15. Ardyansyah BD, Cordier R, Brewer M, Parsons D. A psychometric evaluation of the Indonesian version of the collaborative practice assessment tool (CPAT) for assessing interprofessional education and collaborative practice among health practitioners and students. Narra J. 2024;4(3):e1106.
  16. Ardyansyah BD, Cordier R, Brewer ML, Parsons D. Psychometric evaluation of the culturally adapted interprofessional socialisation and valuing scale (ISVS)-19 for health practitioners and students in Indonesia. Journal of Interprofessional Care. 2024;38(2):283-93.
  17. Holmboe ES. Faculty and the observation of trainees’ clinical skills: problems and opportunities. Acad Med. 2004;79(1):16-22.
  18. Vaismoradi M, Turunen H, Bondas T. Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & health sciences. 2013;15(3):398-405.
  19. Azungah T. Qualitative research: deductive and inductive approaches to data analysis. Qualitative research journal. 2018;18(4):383-400.
  20. Nowell LS, Norris JM, White DE, Moules NJ. Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International journal of qualitative methods. 2017;16(1):1609406917733847.
  21. VERBI Software. MAXQDA 2022 [computer software]. In Berlin, Germany. 2021. Available from: https://www.maxqda.com/.
  22. Govaerts M, van der Vleuten CP. Validity in work‐based assessment: expanding our horizons. Med Educ. 2013;47(12):1164-74.
  23. Mokkink LB, de Vet HC, Prinsen CA, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Bouter LM, et al. COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life Research. 2018;27:1171-9.
  24. O'Daniel M, Rosenstein AH. Professional communication and team collaboration. In Hughes RG. (Ed.), Patient safety and quality: An evidence-based handbook for nurses. US: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2008.
  25. Albano S, Quadri SA, Farooqui M, Arangua L, Clark T, Fischberg GM, et al. Resident perspective on feedback and barriers for use as an educational tool. Cureus. 2019;11(5):e4633.
  26. Day LB, Miles A, Ginsburg S, Melvin L. Resident perceptions of assessment and feedback in competency-based medical education: a focus group study of one internal medicine residency program. Acad Med. 2020;95(11):1712-7.
  27. Duitsman ME, Fluit CR, van der Goot WE, ten Kate-Booij M, de Graaf J, Jaarsma DA. Judging residents’ performance: a qualitative study using grounded theory. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19:1-9.
  28. Leisy HB, Ahmad M. Altering workplace attitudes for resident education (AWARE): discovering solutions for medical resident bullying through literature review. BMC Medical Education. 2016;16:1-10.
  29. Ramani S, Post SE, Könings K, Mann K, Katz JT, van der Vleuten CP. “It's just not the culture”: a qualitative study exploring residents' perceptions of the impact of institutional culture on feedback. Teaching and learning in medicine. 2017;29(2):153-61.
  30. Asmorowati S, Schubert V. Leveraging international education to advance women’s leadership: reflections of Indonesian alumnae of their Australian education experiences; Globalisation, Societies and Education. UK: Taylor and Francis; 2024. pp. 1-17.
  31. Crawford JrFA. Developing administrative skills. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2000;119(4):s33-s37.
  32. Artina BS, Desnasari D, Fitriyah F, Rizkita RG. The workforce in Indonesian organizations: An analysis based upon the cultural dimensions of Hofstede's model. Journal of International Conference Proceedings. 2020;3(1):56-64
  33. Hofstede G. Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. International Educational and Professional. USA: Sage Publications. 2001.
  34. Hofstede G, Hofstede GJ, Pedersen PB. Exploring culture: Exercises, stories and synthetic cultures. Hachette, UK: John Murray Business Academic. 2002.
  35. Ten Cate O. Competency-based education, entrustable professional activities, and the power of language. Journal of Graduate Medical Education. 2013;5(1):6-7.
  36. Ten Cate O. Competency-based medical education and its competency frameworks. Competence-based Vocational and Professional Education: Bridging the Worlds of Work and Education. USA: Springer; 2017. pp. 903-29.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 4
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 2


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب