Pediatric caregiver involvement in the assessment of physicians

BMC Medical Education

Kaylee Eady¹  Catherine M. Pound²  Katherine A. Moreau² 

[1] School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, 451 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, Canada;Department of Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, ON, Canada

关键词: Family-centred;    Pediatrics;    Parents;    Caregivers;    Physician assessment;   

Others  :  1224509
DOI  :  10.1186/s12909-015-0402-6

 received in 2014-07-14, accepted in 2015-07-06,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Given the growth and benefits of consumerist and family-centred approaches to pediatric health care, there is a need to involve pediatric caregivers in the assessment of their children’s physicians.

Discussion

We present interconnected questions that are important to address in order to facilitate pediatric caregiver involvement in the assessment of their children’s physicians.

Summary

Pediatric caregivers can be valuable assessors of physicians’ non-technical skills. It is important to conduct additional research on caregiver involvement in assessment activities and create a reflective discourse on this topic. To ensure that pediatric caregivers’ assessments of physicians are formally recognized and advantageous, it is important to understand: (a) what pediatric caregivers can assess; (b) what assessment tools exist for pediatric caregivers; (c) how to create appropriate assessment tools for pediatric caregivers; (d) how to collect pediatric caregivers’ assessments; (e) how to increase the legitimacy, use, and effectiveness of pediatric caregivers’ assessments; and (f) the consequences of pediatric caregiver assessment.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Moreau et al.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]McGraw M, Fellows S, Long A, Millar H, Muir G, Thomson A, et al. Feedback on doctors' performance from parents and carers of children: a national pilot study. Arch Dis Child. 2011;97:206–10.
• [2]Overeem K, Wollersheimh H, Arah OA, Cruijsberg J, Grol R, Lombarts KMJMH. Factors predicting doctors’ reporting of performance change in response to multisource feedback. BMC Med Educ. 2012; 12:1-7. BioMed Central Full Text
• [3]Ahuja AS, Williams R. Involving patients and their carers in educating and training practitioners. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2005; 18:374-80.
• [4]Stacy R, Spencer J. Patients as teachers: a qualitative study of patients’ views on their role in a community-based undergraduate project. Med Educ. 1999; 33:688-94.
• [5]Wykurz G, Kelly D. Developing the role of patients as teachers: literature review. BMJ. 2002; 325:818-21.
• [6]Spencer J, Blackmore D, Heard S, McCrorie P, McHaffie D, Scherpbier A, et al. Patient-oriented learning: a review of the role of the patient in the education of medical students. Med Educ. 2000;34:851–57.
• [7]Towle A, Bainbridge L, Godolphin W, Katz A, Kline C, Lown B, et al. Active patient involvement in the education of health professionals. Med Educ. 2010;44:64–74.
• [8]Burford B, Greco M, Bedi A, Kergon C, Morrow G, Livingston M, et al. Does questionnaire-based patient feedback reflect the important qualities of clinical consultations? Context, benefits and risks. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;84:e28–36.
• [9]Sargeant J, Mann K, Sinclair D, van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes. Med Educ. 2007; 41(6):583-91.
• [10]Crossley J, Eiser C, Davies HA. Children and their parents assessing the doctor-patient interaction: a rating system for doctors' communication skills. Med Educ. 2005; 39(8):820-28.
• [11]Hanson JL, Randall VF. Advancing a partnership: patients, families, and medicaleducators. Teach Learn Med. 2007;19(2):191–97.
• [12]Boon H, Stewart M. Patient-physician communication assessment instruments: 1986 to 1996 in review. Patient Educ Couns. 1998; 35:161-76.
• [13]Street R. Physicians' Communication and Parents' Evaluations of Pediatric Consultations. Med Care. 1991; 29:1146-52.
• [14]Chisholm A, Askham J. What do you think of your doctor? A review of questionnaires for gathering patients' feedback on their doctor. Picker Institute Europe, Oxford (UK); 2006.
• [15]Crossley J, Davies H. Doctors' consultations with children and their parents: a model of competencies, outcomes and confounding influences. Med Educ. 2005; 39(8):807-19.
• [16]Davies H, Howells R. How to assess your specialist registrar. Arch Dis Child. 2004; 89:1089-93.
• [17]Crossley J, McDonnell J, Cooper C, McAvoy P, Archer J, Davies H. Can a district hospital assess its doctors for re-licensure? Med Educ. 2008; 42(4):359-63.
• [18]Willis G. Cognitive interviewing: a tool for improving questionnaire design. Sage, Thousand Oaks; 2005.
• [19]Willis G, Schechter S, Whittaker T. A comparison of cognitive interviewing, expert review, and behaviour coding: what do they tell us? In: American Statistical Association 1999. American Statistical Association. 1999. http://www.amstat.org/sections/SRMS/Proceedings/papers/1999_006.pdf. Accessed 24 March 2015.
• [20]Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res. 2003; 12:229-238.
• [21]Penny JA. Exploring differential item functioning in a 360° assessment: rater source and method of delivery. Organ Res Meth. 2003; 6:61-79.
• [22]Canadian internet use survey. Statistics Canada, Ottawa; 2010.
• [23]Lockyer J. Multi source feedback in the assessment of physician competencies. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2003; 23:4-12.
• [24]Downing S. Validity: on the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ. 2003; 37:830-37.