Warren J. Cheung

Faculty mentorship during residency and professional development among practising emergency physicians

OBJECTIVE Mentorship is perceived to be an important component of residency education. However, evidence of the impact of mentorship on professional development in Emergency Medicine (EM) is lacking. METHODS Online survey distributed to attending physician members of the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP), using a modified Dillman method. Survey contained questions about mentorship during residency training, and perceptions of the impact of mentorship on career development. RESULTS The response rate was 23.5% (309/1314). 63.6% reported having at least one mentor during residency. The proportion of participants with a formal mentorship component during residency was higher among those with mentors (44.5%) compared to those without any formal mentorship component during residency (8.0%, p<0.001). The most common topics discussed with mentors were career planning and work-life balance. The least common topics included research and finances. While many participants consulted their mentor regarding their first job (56.5%), fewer consulted their mentor regarding subspecialty training (45.1%) and research (41.1%). 71.8% chose to work in a similar centre as their mentor, but few completed the same subspecialty (24.8%), or performed similar research (30.4%). 94.1% stated that mentorship was important to success during residency. Participants in a formal mentorship program did not rate their experience of mentorship higher than those without a formal program. CONCLUSIONS Among academic EM physicians with an interest in mentorship, mentorship during EM residency may have a greater association with location of practice than academic scholarship or subspecialty choice. Formal mentorship programs increase the likelihood of obtaining a mentor, but do not appear to improve reported mentorship experiences.

Supervisor–trainee continuity and the quality of work-based assessments

Work‐based assessments (WBAs) represent an increasingly important means of reporting expert judgements of trainee competence in clinical practice. However, the quality of WBAs completed by clinical supervisors is of concern. The episodic and fragmented interaction that often occurs between supervisors and trainees has been proposed as a barrier to the completion of high‐quality WBAs.

Daily Encounter Cards—Evaluating the Quality of Documented Assessments

ABSTRACT Background  Concerns over the quality of work-based assessment (WBA) completion has resulted in faculty development and rater training initiatives. Daily encounter cards (DECs) are a common form of WBA used in ambulatory care and shift work settings. A tool is needed to evaluate initiatives aimed at improving the quality of completion of this widely used form of WBA. Objective  The completed clinical evaluation report rating (CCERR) was designed to provide a measure of the quality of documented assessments on in-training evaluation reports. The purpose of this study was to provide validity evidence to support using the CCERR to assess the quality of DEC completion. Methods  Six experts in resident assessment grouped 60 DECs into 3 quality categories (high, average, and poor) based on how informative each DEC was for reporting judgments of the residents performance. Eight supervisors (blinded to the expert groupings) scored the 10 most representative DECs in each group using the CCERR. Mean score...