Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Priorities for Public Health Spending—Reply

Priorities for Public Health Spending—Reply Letters with the RAES in identifying trainees who demonstrate inad- analysis to undertake when data are available. eTable 7 in the equate professionalism. First, what was the trajectory of supplemental content of the article provides results for the sec- scores in subsequent years among trainees with low scores ond analysis proposed by Monach, a comparison of postgradu- on professionalism during the first year? Second, did the ate year-3 milestone ratings for professionalism to ratings using third-year trainees who scored poorly on milestones for pro- the RAES. This Table shows that 47 third-year residents who fessionalism have similar assessment by the RAES? The were rated low (below 2, signaling concerning professional be- assessments should be highly correlated. If milestones pro- havior) in professionalism using the milestones had RAES duced more low scores in year 3 than the RAES, then exami- ratings that ranged from 1 to 3 (unsatisfactory for 3 residents) nation of the 4 subcompetencies comprising the profession- to 7 to 9 (superior for 13 residents). We believe that the greater alism competency might indicate whether milestones are granularity of the milestones, with 4 professionalism subcom- indeed capturing more information. petencies compared with a single RAES rating for profession- http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Priorities for Public Health Spending—Reply

Emanuel, Ezekiel J.
JAMA , Volume 317 (12) – Mar 28, 2017
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/priorities-for-public-health-spending-reply-urOENPU0IW

References (5)

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2017 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.2017.1851
pmid
28350923
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Letters with the RAES in identifying trainees who demonstrate inad- analysis to undertake when data are available. eTable 7 in the equate professionalism. First, what was the trajectory of supplemental content of the article provides results for the sec- scores in subsequent years among trainees with low scores ond analysis proposed by Monach, a comparison of postgradu- on professionalism during the first year? Second, did the ate year-3 milestone ratings for professionalism to ratings using third-year trainees who scored poorly on milestones for pro- the RAES. This Table shows that 47 third-year residents who fessionalism have similar assessment by the RAES? The were rated low (below 2, signaling concerning professional be- assessments should be highly correlated. If milestones pro- havior) in professionalism using the milestones had RAES duced more low scores in year 3 than the RAES, then exami- ratings that ranged from 1 to 3 (unsatisfactory for 3 residents) nation of the 4 subcompetencies comprising the profession- to 7 to 9 (superior for 13 residents). We believe that the greater alism competency might indicate whether milestones are granularity of the milestones, with 4 professionalism subcom- indeed capturing more information. petencies compared with a single RAES rating for profession-

Journal

JAMA – American Medical Association

Published: Mar 28, 2017

There are no references for this article.