HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Data Supplement Correspondence: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Correspondence are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Schmahmann, J. D. Articles by MacMore, J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Schmahmann, J. D. Articles by MacMore, J. Related Collections All Education Methods of education Other Education

Evaluation of the assessment and grading of medical students on a neurology clerkship

From the Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Jeremy D. Schmahmann, Neurology Clerkship Director, Department of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Suite 340, Charles River Plaza South, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA 02114 jschmahmann{at}partners.org

Objective: To describe a clinical encounter (Bedside Examination Exercise [BEE]) used for assessment and teaching in the Massachusetts General Hospital neurology clerkship; to compare results of the BEE with the Harvard Medical School Subjective Evaluation Form (SEF) and National Board of Medical Examiners Shelf examination (Shelf); and to develop a grading system that assesses multiple skills and reflects proficiency.

Methods: The BEE was administered to 409 students. Final grades were compared with those of 71 students evaluated with the SEF alone. We compared results on the SEF, BEE, and Shelf examination in another 132 students. A composite score was developed, weighted SEF 70%, BEE 15%, and Shelf 15%, to derive the final grade.

Results: The BEE helped limit grade inflation, but did not predict final grade determined by the SEF. Grades from the three test instruments had normal distributions, but different means and SDs: SEF 84% ± 10.3%; BEE 83% ± 9.3%; Shelf 69% ± 8.4%. There was poor agreement among individual students between different tests, even within core competencies. The 70-15-15 composite score had a normal distribution, 81% ± 8.5%.

Conclusions: The Bedside Examination Exercise (BEE) is useful for assessing and teaching clinical skills. No single test instrument predicts results of another with acceptable accuracy. Use of complimentary assessment tools (BEE, Subjective Evaluation Form, and Shelf) lessens uncertainty in deriving the composite score, and facilitates evaluation of different attributes. The composite score enables a five-tier grading system that recognizes proficiency, rewards excellence, and provides meaningful feedback. This approach could be generalized to other clerkships.

Abbreviations: ACGME = Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education; BEE = Bedside Examination Exercise; H = honors; H1 = honors 1; H2 = honors 2; HH = high honors; HMS = Harvard Medical School; MGH = Massachusetts General Hospital; NBME = National Board of Medical Examiners; S = satisfactory grade; SEF = Subjective Evaluation Form.

Supplemental data at www.neurology.org

Supported in part by The Academy at Harvard Medical School and the Birmingham Foundation.

Disclosure: The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Presented in part at the 59th annual meeting of the American Academy of Neurology, Boston, March 2007.

Received April 24, 2007. Accepted in final form September 6, 2007.