Using the Readiness for Clerkship and Residency Surveys to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Four MD Programs: A Cross-Institutional Generalizability Study.

PURPOSE: The importance of confidence for learning and performance makes learners' perceptions of readiness for the next level of training valuable indicators of curricular success. The "Readiness for Clerkship" (RfC) and "Readiness for Residency" (RfR) surveys have been shown to provide reliable ratings of the relative effectiveness of various aspects of training. This study examines the generalizability of those results. METHOD: Surveys were administered at four medical schools approximately four months after the start of clerkship and eight months after the start of residency during 2013-2015. Collected data were anonymized. A total of 647 medical students and 483 residents participated. RESULTS: Reliabilities of G = 0.8 could be obtained with only 6 to 12 medical students and 8 to 15 residents. Within MD programs, no meaningful differences in item ratings were observed across cohorts. Residents in each school consistently rated themselves higher than clerks on the majority of Medical Expert and Communicator competencies common to both surveys. Similar strengths and weaknesses were identified across programs, but differences were observed on five clerkship items and one residency item. CONCLUSIONS: Across four MD programs, the RfC and RfR surveys provided reliable ratings of the relative effectiveness of aspects of training with small numbers of respondents. The capacity of these surveys to efficiently identify perceived strengths and weaknesses held by cohorts of learners may, thereby, facilitate program improvement.

Examining the impact of early longitudinal patient exposure on medical students' career choices.

BACKGROUND: Medical schools include career direction experiences to help students make informed career decisions. Most experiences are short, precluding students from attaining adequate exposure to long-term encounters within medicine. We investigated the impact of the First Patient Program (FPP), which fosters longitudinal patient exposure by pairing junior medical students with chronically ill patients through their healthcare journey, in instilling career direction. METHODS: Medical students who completed at least 6-months in the FPP participated in a cross-sectional survey. Students' answers were analyzed with respect to the number of FPP appointments attended. Thematic analysis was conducted to explore qualitative responses. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-eight students participated in the survey. Only 28 (19%) students stated that the FPP informed their career decisions. Thirty-nine percent of students who attended four or more appointments indicated that the FPP informed their career decisions, compared to 16% of students who attended less (p=0.021). Thematic analysis revealed two themes: 1) Students focused mainly on patient encounters within FPP; and 2) Students sought career directions from other experiences. CONCLUSION: The majority of students did not attain career guidance from the FPP, but rather used the program to understand the impact of chronic illness from the patient's perspective.