Workplace-based assessment for general practitioners: using stakeholder perception to aid blueprinting of an assessment battery

Abstract

The implementation of an assessment system may be facilitated by stakeholder agreement that appropriate qualities are being tested. This study investigated the extent to which stakeholders perceived 8 assessment formats (multiple-choice questions, objective structured clinical examination, video, significant event analysis, criterion audit, multi-source feedback, case analysis and patient satisfaction questionnaire) as able to assess varying qualities of doctors training in UK general practice. Educationalists, general practice trainers and registrars completed a blueprinting style of exercise to rate the extent to which each evaluation format was perceived to assess each of 8 competencies derived primarily from the General Medical Council document 'Good Medical Practice'. There were high levels of agreement among stakeholders regarding the perceived qualities tested by the proposed formats (G = 0.82-0.93). Differences were found in participants' perceptions of how well qualities were able to be assessed and in the ability of the respective formats to test each quality. Multi-source feedback (MSF) was expected to assess a wide range of qualities, whereas Probity, Health and Ability to work with colleagues were limited in terms of how well they could be tested by the proposed formats. Awareness of the perceptions of stakeholders should facilitate the development and implementation of workplace-based assessment (WPBA) systems. These data shed light on the acceptability of various formats in a way that will inform further investigation of WPBA formats' validity and feasibility, while also providing evidence on which to base educational efforts regarding the value of each format.