| Title |
Assessing the Culture of Residency Using the C - Change Resident Survey: Validity Evidence in 34 U.S. Residency Programs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of General Internal Medicine, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11606-017-4038-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linda H. Pololi, Arthur T. Evans, Janet T. Civian, Sandy Shea, Robert T. Brennan |
| Abstract |
A practical instrument is needed to reliably measure the clinical learning environment and professionalism for residents. To develop and present evidence of validity of an instrument to assess the culture of residency programs and the clinical learning environment. During 2014-2015, we surveyed residents using the C - Change Resident Survey to assess residents' perceptions of the culture in their programs. Residents in all years of training in 34 programs in internal medicine, pediatrics, and general surgery in 14 geographically diverse public and private academic health systems. The C - Change Resident Survey assessed residents' perceptions of 13 dimensions of the culture: Vitality, Self-Efficacy, Institutional Support, Relationships/Inclusion, Values Alignment, Ethical/Moral Distress, Respect, Mentoring, Work-Life Integration, Gender Equity, Racial/Ethnic Minority Equity, and self-assessed Competencies. We measured the internal reliability of each of the 13 dimensions and evaluated response process, content validity, and construct-related evidence validity by assessing relationships predicted by our conceptual model and prior research. We also assessed whether the measurements were sensitive to differences in specialty and across institutions. A total of 1708 residents completed the survey [internal medicine: n = 956, pediatrics: n = 411, general surgery: n = 311 (51% women; 16% underrepresented in medicine minority)], with a response rate of 70% (range across programs, 51-87%). Internal consistency of each dimension was high (Cronbach α: 0.73-0.90). The instrument was able to detect significant differences in the learning environment across programs and sites. Evidence of validity was supported by a good response process and the demonstration of several relationships predicted by our conceptual model. The C - Change Resident Survey assesses the clinical learning environment for residents, and we encourage further study of validity in different contexts. Results could be used to facilitate and monitor improvements in the clinical learning environment and resident well-being. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 24 | 27% |
| Unknown | 27 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 7% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Psychology | 5 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 35 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 July 2017.
All research outputs
#14,223,569
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#5,262
of 7,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,636
of 311,989 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of General Internal Medicine
#52
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,806 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,989 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.