Search

Abstract Background Parents can assess residents’ non-technical skills (NTS) in pediatric emergency departments (EDs). There are no assessment tools, with validity evidence, for parental use in pediatric EDs. The purpose of this study was to develop the Parents’ Assessment of Residents Enacting Non-Technical Skills (PARENTS) educational assessment tool and collect three sources of validity evidence (i.e., content, response process, internal structure) for it. Methods We established content evidence for the PARENTS through interviews with physician-educators and residents, focus groups with parents, a literature review, and a modified nominal group technique with experts. We collected response process evidence through cognitive interviews with parents. To examine the internal structure evidence, we administered the PARENTS and performed exploratory factor analysis. Results Initially, a 20-item PARENTS was developed. Cognitive interviews led to the removal of one closed-ended item, the addition of resident photographs, and wording/formatting changes. Thirty-seven residents and 434 parents participated in the administration of the resulting 19-item PARENTS. Following factor analysis, a one-factor model prevailed. Conclusions The study presents initial validity evidence for the PARENTS. It also highlights strategies for potentially: (a) involving parents in the assessment of residents, (b) improving the assessment of NTS in pediatric EDs, and (c) capturing parents’ perspectives to improve the preparation of future physicians.

Haptic perception is used in the anatomy laboratory with the handling of three-dimensional (3D) prosections, dissections, and synthetic models of anatomical structures. Vision-based spatial ability has been found to correlate with performance on tests of 3D anatomy knowledge in previous studies. The objective was to explore whether haptic-based spatial ability was correlated with vision-based spatial ability. Vision-based spatial ability was measured in a study group of 49 medical graduates with three separate tests: a redrawn Vandenberg and Kuse Mental Rotations Tests in two (MRT A) and three (MRT C) dimensions and a Surface Development Test (SDT). Haptic-based spatial ability was measured using 18 different objects constructed from 10 cubes glued together. Participants were asked to draw these objects from blind haptic perception, and drawings were scored by two independent judges. The maximum score was 24 for each of MRT A and MRT C, 60 for SDT, and 18 for the drawings. The drawing score based on haptic perception [median = 17 (lower quartile = 16, upper quartile = 18)] correlated with MRT A [14 (9, 17)], MRT C [9 (7, 12)] and SDT [44 (36, 52)] scores with a Spearman's rank correlation coefficient of 0.395 (p = 0.0049), 0.507 (p = 0.0002) and 0.606 (p < 0.0001), respectively. Spatial abilities assessed by vision-based tests were correlated with a drawing score based on haptic perception of objects. Future research should investigate the contribution of haptic-based and vision-based spatial abilities on learning 3D anatomy from physical models.