PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 956262

Resident evaluation - is our method effective?

Abstract

In an earlier paper, "Resident Evaluation--Is Your Method Effective?", it was emphasized that the objectives for the residency program in Radiology should be clearly delineated and used to judge the performance of the resident in all stages of the training program. After having had approximately three years' experience in the use of the procedures outlined in the original paper, we are recommending some changes and modifications. The purpose of the evaluation is to provide clear and detailed evidence of the performance of the resident over the period of his training program. As outlined in the previous paper, the basic principles -- learning is a very individual matter, learning depends on the motivation of the individual, and learning depends on the satisfaction in the learning task--remain unaltered. Changes have been made in the design, execution and details of evaluation. The final sucess of any training program will necessarily be measured by the degree to which the residents attain the outlined objectives of the program and the degree to which the graduates of the program are accepted into the specialty by the accrediting bodies.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L A Fisher, H E Duggan, A Fisher. 1976. Resident evaluation - is our method effective?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/956262/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Investing in Canada's nursing workforce: a comprehensive review to inform policy innovations and directions.

BACKGROUND: Health systems worldwide face persistent health workers challenges including nursing shortages, workforce strain, and inequities. In Canada, these challenges have prompted renewed national and provincial reforms to strengthen recruitment, retention, leadership, and sustainability. This paper compares nursing workforce policy directions across Canada, and international jurisdictions to inform policy and planning. METHODS: A cross-country comparative analysis of policies building on a comprehensive national funded review that included an umbrella review of 69 systematic reviews, a comparative policy review of nursing workforce strategies in five jurisdictions, and validation through national horizon-scanning and policy dialogues (n >100). Evidence was analyzed across system, organizational, and individual levels. RESULTS: At the system level, international jurisdictions demonstrate comprehensive, legislated approaches integrating data, governance, and multi-year funding have advanced key nursing strategies. In Canada, the advances show the importance of strategies to have national and provincial/territorial alignment emphasizing leadership, flexibility, and inclusion as key levers. Organizational and individual-level reforms such as mentorship, leadership development, and wellness initiatives are expanding but remain variably evaluated. Experts identified national workforce data strategies and policy integration with embedded evaluation as key enablers to inform scalability and sustainability of implemented strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Canada's nursing workforce reforms are advancing toward coordinated, equity-driven, and evidence-informed strategies. Continued investment in evaluation, leadership, and national integrated data systems along with integrating nursing workforce planning within broader intersectoral planning will consolidate these gains and position Canada as an international leader in sustainable nursing workforce policy.

Canada