PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L C Webb

Publications and source records attributed to L C Webb.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1996

How well does the psychiatry residency in-training examination predict performance on the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology. Part I. Examination?

OBJECTIVE: Scores on the American College of Psychiatrists' Psychiatry Residency In-Training Examination (PRITE) were correlated with scores on the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology (ABPN) Part I examination in psychiatry. METHOD: Pearson correlations between 1992 PRITE scores and 1994 ABPN Part I psychiatry scores were calculated. Analyses were based on 701 examinees. RESULTS: There was a moderate correlation between scores on the PRITE and ABPN Part I examination in psychiatry and a low correlation of neurology scores. CONCLUSIONS: These correlations were observed even though the two examinations differ in their purposes, content outlines, development, and administration.

Educational Measurement↗
PubMed1995

The use of cognitive taxonomies in licensure and certification test development: reasonable or customary?

This research addressed the functioning of a cognitive taxonomy within the test specifications of a health sciences certification examination. The research investigated whether test items written purposefully to assess the higher order cognitive processes provided evidence of assessing differing levels of cognitive processing. Overall, the results yielded no support for the continuing use of a hierarchical cognitive classification dimension for the test specifications. Implications of the research for test specifications development, test construction, item writing, and score reporting are presented. Limitations and suggestions for future research are provided.

Certification↗
PubMed1992

Training directors' opinions about the psychiatry resident in-training examination (PRITE).

OBJECTIVE: The American College of Psychiatrists conducted research to validate the content outline of the Psychiatry Resident In-Training Examination (PRITE) and to assess what residency training directors think about the examination. METHOD: A mail survey was sent to the 218 psychiatry residency training directors who subscribe to the PRITE. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 70%. A majority of the respondents indicated agreement with the relative emphasis given to each content area in the PRITE (range = 52%-80% agreement). Eighty-one percent of the respondents were strongly in favor of continuing the practice of releasing the examination and the correct responses each year after the examinations have been scored. The majority of the respondents use results on the PRITE for individual resident evaluation and program evaluation (90% and 94%, respectively). Very few respondents use the PRITE results as the sole measure for assessing residents' cognitive competence or use it for marketing their residency programs. CONCLUSIONS: The survey provided strong support for the content areas covered in the PRITE and their relative emphases. The current practice of releasing PRITE items and answers (a main difference between the PRITE and the certification examination of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology) was well supported by the survey results. The stated purpose of the PRITE, to provide educationally useful feedback for individuals and groups in the form of comparisons with peers in specific areas of knowledge, was supported by a large majority of the respondents.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1991

Correcting performance-rating errors in oral examinations.

Although oral examinations are widely used for making decisions regarding an individual's level of competence, they are frequently of limited reliability. A significant part of the error in oral performance ratings is due to the tendency for some evaluators to be lenient and others to be stringent in their assignment of ratings. This article describes and evaluates a simple method to identify and correct for errors of leniency and stringency. The method, which is based on a regression model recommended by Wilson (1988), extends and simplifies the procedures recommended by Cason and Cason (1984, 1985). The method provides an estimate of each individual's performance that has been corrected for errors of leniency and stringency. In addition, it produces for each rater an index of leniency or stringency and several other statistics useful in evaluating the properties of rating data. The regression method is applied to performance ratings from three separate administrations of an oral examination in a medical specialty. The results indicate modest but significant levels of leniency and stringency error; correcting for such errors would change the pass/fail decisions for about 6% of the examinees. Limitations of the procedure, as well as the need for additional research, are discussed.

Certification↗