Peer mentoring in doctor performance assessment: Strategies, obstacles and benefits

Medical Education

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 140-147

  Overeem, Karlijn ^a,b   Driessen, Erik W ^c   Arah, Onyebuchi A ^a,d   Lombarts, Kiki M J M H ^a,b   Wollersheim, Hub C ^a   Grol, Richard P T M ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^c MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MULTICENTER STUDY; NETHERLANDS; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PEER GROUP; PILOT STUDY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE; TEACHER;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, CONTINUING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTORS; NETHERLANDS; PEER GROUP; PILOT PROJECTS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 75149175607     PISSN: 03080110     EISSN: 13652923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03580.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Hays RB, Davies HA, Beard JD, Caldon LJ, Farmer EA, Finucane PM, McCrorie P, Newble DI, Schuwirth LW, Sibbald GR. Selecting performance assessment methods for experienced doctors. Med Educ 2002 36: 910 917.
2. Eva KW, Regehr G. "I'll never play professional football" and other fallacies of self-assessment. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2008 28: 14 9.
3. Epstein RM, Siegel DJ, Silberman J. Self-monitoring in clinical practice: a challenge for medical educators. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2008 28: 5 13.
4. Hodges B, Regehr G, Martin D. Difficulties in recognising one's own incompetence: novice doctors who are unskilled and unaware of it. Acad Med 2001 76 (Suppl 10 87 9.
5. Davis DA, Mazmanian PE, Fordis M, Van Harrison R, Thorpe KE, Perrier L. Accuracy of doctor self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence-a systematic review. JAMA 2006 296: 1094 1102.
6. Lockyer JM, Violato C. An examination of the appropriateness of using a common peer assessment instrument to assess doctor skills across specialties. Acad Med 2004 79 (Suppl 10 5 8.
7. Teleki SS, Shaw R, Damberg CL, McGlynn EA. Providing Performance Feedback to Individual Doctors: Current Practice and Emerging Lessons. RAND Health. [Working Paper.] 2006. http://www.rand.org/pubs/working-papers/ WR381/. [Accessed 11 December 2008]
8. Violato C, Fidler H. Likelihood of change: a study assessing surgeon use of multi-source feedback data. Teach Learn Med 2003 15: 168 174.
9. Lockyer JM, Violato C, Fidler HM. What multi-source feedback factors influence doctor self-assessments? A 5-year longitudinal study. Acad Med 2007 82 (Suppl 10 77 80.
10. Sargeant J, Mann K, Sinclair D, Ferrier S, Muirhead P, Van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. Learning in practice: experiences and perceptions of high-scoring doctors. Acad Med 2006 81: 655 660.
11. Sargeant J, Mann K, Sinclair D, van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. Understanding the influence of emotions and reflection upon multi-source feedback acceptance and use. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2008 13: 275 288.
12. Seifert CF, Yukl G, McDonald RA. Effects of multi-source feedback and a feedback facilitator on the influence of behaviour of managers toward subordinates. J Appl Psychol 2003 88: 561 569.
13. Luthans F, Peterson SJ. 360-degree feedback with systematic coaching: empirical analysis suggests a winning combination. Hum Resour Manage 2003 42: 243 256.
14. Connor MP, Bynoe AG, Redfern N, Pokora J, Clarke J. Developing senior doctors as mentors: a form of continuing professional development. Report of an initiative to develop a network of senior doctors as mentors: 1994-1999. Med Educ 2000 34: 747 753.
15. Driessen E, van Tartwijk TJ, Dornan T. The self-critical doctor: helping students become more reflective. BMJ 2008 336: 827 830.
16. Lewis M, Elwyn G, Wood F. Appraisal of family doctors: an evaluation study. Br J Gen Pract 2003 53: 454 460.
17. Blank LL, Cohen JJ. Feedback improves performance: validating a first principle. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2007 161: 103 104.
18. Overeem K, Lombarts MJMH, Arah OA, Klazinga NS, Grol RPTM, Wollersheim HC. Three methods of multi-source feedback compared. A plea for narrative comments and co-workers' perspectives. Med Teach 2009 In press.
19. Miles MB, Huberman M. Qualitative Data Analysis: an Expanded Source Book, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications 1994 172 245.
20. Lincoln YS, Guba G. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications 1985 357 82.
21. Overeem K, Wollersheim HC, Driessen E, Lombarts K, Van de Ven G, Grol R, Arah OA. Doctors' perceptions of why 360-degree feedback does (not) work: a qualitative study. Med Educ 2009 43: 874 882.
22. Galbraith RM, Hawkins RE, Holmboe ES. Making self-assessment more effective. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2008 28: 20 4.
23. McKinstry B, Peacock H, Shaw J. GP experiences of partner and external peer appraisal: a qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 2005 55: 539 543.
24. McKay J, Shepherd A, Bowie P, Lough M. Acceptability and educational impact of a peer feedback model for significant event analysis. Med Educ 2008 42: 1210 1217.
25. Violato C, Lockyer JM, Fidler H. Changes in performance: a 5-year longitudinal study of participants in a multi-source feedback programme. Med Educ 2008 42: 1007 1013.
26. Sargeant J, Mann K, van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. Directed self-assessment: practice and feedback within a social context. J Contin Educ Health Prof 2008 28: 47 54.