Development and testing of an assessment instrument for the formative peer review of significant event analyses
- 1 April 2007
- journal article
- review article
- Published by BMJ in Quality and Safety in Health Care
- Vol. 16 (2), 150-153
- https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2006.020750
Abstract
To establish the content validity and specific aspects of reliability for an assessment instrument designed to provide formative feedback to general practitioners (GPs) on the quality of their written analysis of a significant event. Content validity was quantified by application of a content validity index. Reliability testing involved a nested design, with 5 cells, each containing 4 assessors, rating 20 unique significant event analysis (SEA) reports (10 each from experienced GPs and GPs in training) using the assessment instrument. The variance attributable to each identified variable in the study was established by analysis of variance. Generalisability theory was then used to investigate the instrument's ability to discriminate among SEA reports. Content validity was demonstrated with at least 8 of 10 experts endorsing all 10 items of the assessment instrument. The overall G coefficient for the instrument was moderate to good (G>0.70), indicating that the instrument can provide consistent information on the standard achieved by the SEA report. There was moderate inter-rater reliability (G>0.60) when four raters were used to judge the quality of the SEA. This study provides the first steps towards validating an instrument that can provide educational feedback to GPs on their analysis of significant events. The key area identified to improve instrument reliability is variation among peer assessors in their assessment of SEA reports. Further validity and reliability testing should be carried out to provide GPs, their appraisers and contractual bodies with a validated feedback instrument on this aspect of the general practice quality agenda.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Variations in the ability of general medical practitioners to apply two methods of clinical audit: a five‐year study of assessment by peer reviewJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 2006
- Review of instruments for peer assessment of physiciansBMJ, 2004
- The need for needs assessment in continuing medical educationBMJ, 2004
- Awareness and analysis of a significant event by general practitioners: a cross sectional surveyQuality and Safety in Health Care, 2004
- Peer assessment of competenceMedical Education, 2003
- Significant event audit in practice: a preliminary study.Family Practice, 2000
- Quality improvement by peer review in primary care: a practical guide.Quality and Safety in Health Care, 1994
- Turning Anecdotes into Data—The Critical Incident TechniqueFamily Practice, 1992
- Determination and Quantification Of Content ValidityNursing Research, 1986
- Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use.American Journal of Public Health, 1984