Abstract
Anchor-based, end-of-shift ratings are commonly used to conduct performance assessments of resident physicians. These performance evaluations often include narrative assessments, such as solicited or “free-text” commentary. Although narrative commentary can help to create a more detailed and specific assessment of performance, there are limited data describing the effects of narrative commentary on the global assessment process. This single-group, observational study examined the effect of narrative comments on global performance assessments. A subgroup of the clinical competency committee, blinded to resident identity, assigned a single, consensus-based performance score (1–6) to each resident based solely on end-of-shift milestone scores. De-identified narrative comments from end-of-shift evaluations were then included and the process was repeated. We compared milestone-only scores to milestone plus narrative commentary scores using a nonparametric sign test. During the study period, 953 end-of-shift evaluations were submitted on 41 residents. Of these, 535 evaluations included free-text narrative comments. In 17 of the 41 observations, performance scores changed after the addition of narrative comments. In two cases, scores decreased with the addition of free-text commentary. In 15 cases, scores increased. The frequency of net positive change was significant (p = .0023). The addition of narrative commentary to anchor-based ratings significantly influenced the global performance assessment of Emergency Medicine residents by a committee of educators. Descriptive commentary collected at the end of shift may inform more meaningful appraisal of a resident’s progress in a milestone-based paradigm. The authors recommend clinical training programs collect unstructured narrative impressions of residents’ performance from supervising faculty.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
