Assessing readiness: the impact of an experiential learning entrustable professional activity-based residency preparatory course.

As medical schools move to integrate the Core Entrustable Professional Activities for Entering Residency (EPAs) into curricula and address the transition from student to resident, residency preparatory courses have become more prevalent. The authors developed an experiential learning EPA-based capstone course for assessment to determine impact on learner self-assessed ratings of readiness for residency and acquisition of medical knowledge. All fourth-year students from the classes of 2018-2020 completed a required course in the spring for assessment of multiple EPAs, including managing core complaints, performing basic procedures, obtaining informed consent, and providing patient handoffs. Learners selected between three specialty-based parallel tracks - adult medicine, surgery, or pediatrics. Students completed a retrospective pre-post questionnaire to provide self-assessed ratings of residency preparedness and comfort in performing EPAs. Finally, the authors studied the impact of the course on knowledge acquisition by comparing student performance in the adult medicine track on multiple choice pre- and post-tests. Four hundred and eighty-one students were eligible for the study and 452 (94%) completed the questionnaire. For all three tracks, there was a statistically significant change in learner self-assessed ratings of preparedness for residency from pre- to post-course (moderately or very prepared: adult medicine 61.4% to 88.6% [p-value < 0.001]; surgery 56.8% to 81.1% [p-value < 0.001]; pediatrics 32.6% to 83.7% [p-value 0.02]). A similar change was noted in all tracks in learner self-assessed ratings of comfort from pre- to post-course for all studied EPAs. Of the 203 students who participated in the adult medicine track from 2019-2020, 200 (99%) completed both the pre- and post-test knowledge assessments. The mean performance improved from 65.0% to 77.5% (p-value < 0.001). An experiential capstone course for the assessment of EPAs can be effective to improve learner self-assessed ratings of readiness for residency training and acquisition of medical knowledge.

Reimagining a pass/fail clinical core clerkship: a US residency program director survey and meta-analysis.

Pass/fail (P/F) grading has emerged as an alternative to tiered clerkship grading. Systematically evaluating existing literature and surveying program directors (PD) perspectives on these consequential changes can guide educators in addressing inequalities in academia and students aiming to improve their residency applications. In our survey, a total of 1578 unique PD responses (63.1%) were obtained across 29 medical specialties. With the changes to United States Medical Licensure Examination (USMLE), responses showed increased importance of core clerkships with the implementation of Step 2CK cutoffs. PDs believed core clerkship performance was a reliable representation of an applicant's preparedness for residency, particularly in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's (ACGME)Medical Knowledge and Patient Care and Procedural Skills. PDs disagreed with P/F core clerkships because it more difficult to objectively compare applicants. No statistically significant differences in responses were found in PD preferential selection when comparing applicants from tiered and P/F core clerkship grading systems. If core clerkships adopted P/F scoring, PDs would further increase emphasis on narrative assessment, sub-internship evaluation, reference letters, academic awards, professional development and medical school prestige. In the meta-analysis, of 6 studies from 2,118 participants, adjusted scaled scores with mean difference from an equal variance model from PDs showed residents from tiered clerkship grading systems overall performance, learning ability, work habits, personal evaluations, residency selection and educational evaluation were not statistically significantly different than from residents from P/F systems. Overall, our dual study suggests that while PDs do not favor P/F core clerkships, PDs do not have a selection preference and do not report a difference in performance between applicants from P/F vs. tiered grading core clerkship systems, thus providing fertile grounds for institutions to examine the feasibility of adopting P/F grading for core clerkships.