PubMed HealthSearch

Biomedical subjects

D D Riordan

Publications and source records attributed to D D Riordan.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

Selecting radiology resident candidates.

Radiology resident candidate selection has become a burdensome, subjective, and somewhat arbitrary process. Because the luxury of many well-qualified candidates exists, there is an obligation to select them as honestly, equitably, and objectively as possible. Two years were spent in revising and modifying the resident selection process to make it more uniform and more efficacious. An application scoring form was devised to extract uniform pertinent information from the original application form. Candidates could then be ranked according to a numerical score derived from the form. This allowed easy selection of top candidates to be interviewed. A new interviewing scoring form was developed to include desirable characteristics of resident candidate performance. This form was also devised in such a way as to be easily scored and to allow selection of the top 20 to 25 candidates. These candidates were then ranked by participating faculty members while reviewing their application score forms and their interview forms. Positions for the residency training program were offered according to the ranking. The usefulness of both new forms was evaluated and confirmed by correlating form scores with faculty ranking of academic performance of current residents in the training program.

District of Columbia

Testing as a teaching tool.

More than four years ago, the authors initiated testing as a means of obtaining data for evaluating residents. The testing process has evolved now and is used for its teaching value and as a means of objective resident self-evaluation. Testing is designed to provide 10 cases an hour, with characteristics allowing a single diagnosis as a unique answer. No history is provided because a common topic and anatomic area provide a context for each examination. Answers are given during the examination after each question, and discussion follows. All answers are written, and answer sheets are collected. Attendance is high. Test scores are routinely lower than in other forms of evaluation. Testing integrates all aspects of radiology training from cognitive through deductive, simulates written consultations, and provides a means of self-evaluation through rapid feedback. Testing is a viable form of teaching that blends self-evaluation with faculty and peer feedback.

Educational Measurement

Ranking: a year three follow-up in a different institution.

Ranking residents as a means of semiobjective evaluation of their overall performance was described in 1985. The predictive nature of pooled faculty ranking of residents was stressed. Ranking of resident total scores on The American College In-training Examination and American Board of Radiology written examination was noted to be statistically related to the pooled faculty ranking. Similarly, the faculty ranking was predictive of itself in subsequent rankings. A cohesiveness of faculty consensus was present such that small numbers (five minimum) were predictive of larger groups of participating faculty. All reported observations persist in the new institution. Exceptions to expected residency level of training stratification (eg, third-year residents ranking in the midst of first-year residents, second-year residents ranking above many third-year residents) continue to be the most useful observation in counseling residents. Additional information reported includes sensitivity of the ranking to improvement or nonimprovement of probated residents.

Achievement

Evaluation of radiology resident cognitive performance.

Using radiographs and slides in three formats, we objectively tested the cognitive performance of 16 residents during an 8-month period. One format tested individual residents with radiographs and required only that a list of findings be provided within a week. For the second method, radiographs were projected to a small group of residents and a single diagnosis for each of ten cases was required. The third format required a larger group of competing residents to view projected slides of ten loosely defined but thematically connected cases and develop one diagnosis. Two of the test formats correlated significantly with a Spearmen rank, r = .50 or better (P less than .025) with a ranking based upon total score on the American College of Radiology Inservice Examination. All three test formats had a Spearmen rank r = .50 or better (P less than .05) when compared with pooled ranking performed by the staff radiologists.

Cognition

Ranking: a reproducible semiobjective means of evaluating overall resident performance.

Eleven staff radiologists evaluated resident performance by independent subjective ranking regardless of residency year. A pooled ranking correlated with a ranking obtained from the total raw score of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Inservice Examination (P less than .005). The staff pooled ranking had a Spearman rank correlation, r = .70, with resident overall performance upon the ACR Inservice Examination. The pooled ranking had a Spearman rank correlation, r = .90, with a subsequent pooled ranking obtained six months later (P less than .0001). This method of ranking accurately predicts ACR Inservice Examination performance and appears to evaluate the objectivity of the staff radiologists involved.

Clinical Competence