Abstract
Background
Direct experience with medical procedures is an important component of medical school training, yet opportunities for medical students have dwindled for various reasons. To offset this, simulated procedures are being integrated into training. However, this comes with additional time commitments required of teaching surgeons regarding assessment of simulation. A solution to this could be peer assessment. We hypothesize that there will be no significant difference between peer assessment when compared to that of a teaching surgeon.
Methods
Third-year medical students were shown 3 simulated procedures by teaching surgeon and provided a grading rubric. Student performances were independently graded by peer assessment and by teaching surgeons. All peer assessment grades and surgeon grades were compared.
Results
Four hundred fifty-nine medical students completed the simulation procedures. Comparisons between the teaching surgeons and peer assessment evaluations demonstrated a 99% interobserver agreement for pass-fail designation and 98% agreement for individual data points (kappa = .78). Survey results demonstrated a significant increase in confidence in performing the tested items and comfort with peer assessment.
Discussion
This analysis demonstrates that the inclusion of peer assessment within medical school is highly comparable to teaching surgeon assessments.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
