Volume 17, Issue 1 (Spring 2022)
jmed 2022, 17(1): 2-14 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Najafipour S, Roustazadeh A, Raoofi R, Rahimi T, Najafipour F, Rayeatdost E, et al . Comparison of Self and Peer Assessment on the Clinical Competence of Medical Students of Jahrom University of Medical Sciences. jmed 2022; 17 (1) :2-14
URL: http://jmed.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-1277-en.html
URL: http://jmed.ssu.ac.ir/article-1-1277-en.html
Sedigheh Najafipour * 
, Abazar Roustazadeh , Rahim Raoofi , Tahere Rahimi , Fateme Najafipour , Esmaeel Rayeatdost , Marziye Haghbin , Ali Dehghani , Majid Kowsari , Ali Kheirandish , Atefe Karamzade Jahromi
, Abazar Roustazadeh , Rahim Raoofi , Tahere Rahimi , Fateme Najafipour , Esmaeel Rayeatdost , Marziye Haghbin , Ali Dehghani , Majid Kowsari , Ali Kheirandish , Atefe Karamzade Jahromi
Assistant Professor of Medical Education, Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Jahrom University of Medical Sciences, Jahrom, Iran , Se_najafipour@yahoo.com
Abstract: (997 Views)
Introduction: Assessing students' professional skills, teamwork and communication proficiency in the clinical environment by multiple evaluators such as educators, peers and students themselves is essential. The aim of this study was to compare the self-assessment method and peer assessment as means of evaluation on the clinical competence of medical students of Jahrom University of Medical Sciences.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed on 110 medical students of University of Medical Sciences in 2020-2021.Convenience sampling method was used. To assess clinical competence, a valid and reliable questionnaire was used in four areas of communicative proficiency, cooperation with the medical team, patient management and practical skills. Data analysis was performed using independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance.
Result: The results of self-assessment showed that students in the field of practical skills (12.44 ± 3.16) were more capable but in the field of communication skills (7.96 ± 2.01) scored low on their ability. Peer assessment, the highest score was seen in the field of practical skills (12.69 ± 2.44) and the least was allocated to the field of cooperation with the treatment team (7.70 ± 1.96.). Comparing the mean scores of self-assessments with the mean scores of peers demonstrated a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Self-assessment and peer assessment as a complementary, applicable and accessible method for assessing students' achievement of expected competencies can be considered in the evaluation system of clinical education.
Methods: This cross-sectional study was performed on 110 medical students of University of Medical Sciences in 2020-2021.Convenience sampling method was used. To assess clinical competence, a valid and reliable questionnaire was used in four areas of communicative proficiency, cooperation with the medical team, patient management and practical skills. Data analysis was performed using independent t-test and one-way analysis of variance.
Result: The results of self-assessment showed that students in the field of practical skills (12.44 ± 3.16) were more capable but in the field of communication skills (7.96 ± 2.01) scored low on their ability. Peer assessment, the highest score was seen in the field of practical skills (12.69 ± 2.44) and the least was allocated to the field of cooperation with the treatment team (7.70 ± 1.96.). Comparing the mean scores of self-assessments with the mean scores of peers demonstrated a statistically significant difference (P < 0.001).
Conclusion: Self-assessment and peer assessment as a complementary, applicable and accessible method for assessing students' achievement of expected competencies can be considered in the evaluation system of clinical education.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Medical Education
Received: 2022/01/3 | Accepted: 2022/04/4 | Published: 2022/06/21
Received: 2022/01/3 | Accepted: 2022/04/4 | Published: 2022/06/21
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
