We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Article |

Residency Evaluations Are They Worth the Effort?

Arthur L. Schueneman, PhD; Jeffrey P. Carley; William H. Baker, MD
Arch Surg. 1994;129(10):1067-1073. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1994.01420340081015.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


Objective:  The accuracy of rotation evaluation forms was assessed to determine the usefulness of clinical performance ratings in predicting competence in a general surgery residency.

Design:  Longitudinal, 15-year, multifactorial, repeated-measures design.

Setting:  University medical center residency training program.

Participants:  General surgery and subspecialty residents (n=310) entering postgraduate training from 1976 to 1990 received 6459 rotation evaluations. Predictive efficiency of 4423 evaluations of a subsample of 199 residents admitted to the general surgery program during the study period was assessed using several outcome measures.

Main Outcome Measure:  Attending surgeons categorized and ranked residents' competence at the completion of training.

Results:  Rotation evaluations identified 77.8% of residents who involuntarily withdrew. Prediction of outcome category (problem, average, or superior residents), as well as final ranking (R2=.54), were demonstrated (P<.001). Evaluations of residents from the first year of training onward predicted outcome at the end of training (P<.01).

Conclusion:  Rotation evaluations demonstrate predictive validity in documenting resident performance, particularly when the accuracy of individual raters is known.(Arch Surg. 1994;129:1067-1073)


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.