검색연산자 | 기능 | 검색시 예 |
---|---|---|
() | 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 | 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine)) |
공백 | 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 | 예1) (나노 기계) 예2) 나노 장영실 |
| | 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 | 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역) 예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실 |
! | NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 | 예1) (황금 !백금) 예2) !image |
* | 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 | 예) semi* |
"" | 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 | 예) "Transform and Quantization" |
IntroductionThe Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) appendices provide a program director with comparative performance for a student’s academic and professional attributes, but they are frequently absent or incomplete.MethodsWe reviewed MSPEs from applicants to our emergency medicine residency program from 134 of 136 (99%) U.S. allopathic medical schools, over two application cycles (2012–13, 2014–15). We determined the degree of compliance with each of the five recommended MSPE appendices.ResultsOnly three (2%) medical schools were compliant with all five appendices. The medical school information page (MSIP, appendix E) was present most commonly (85%), followed by comparative clerkship performance (appendix B, 82%), overall performance (appendix D, 59%), preclinical performance (appendix A, 57%), and professional attributes (appendix C, 18%). Few schools (7%) provided student-specific, comparative professionalism assessments.ConclusionMedical schools inconsistently provide graphic, comparative data for their students in the MSPE. Although program directors (PD) value evidence of an applicant’s professionalism when selecting residents, medical schools rarely provide such useful, comparative professionalism data in their MSPEs. As PDs seek to evaluate applicants based on academic performance and professionalism, rather than standardized testing alone, medical schools must make MSPEs more consistent, objective, and comparative.
원문 PDF 다운로드
원문 URL 링크
원문 PDF 파일 및 링크정보가 존재하지 않을 경우 KISTI DDS 시스템에서 제공하는 원문복사서비스를 사용할 수 있습니다. (원문복사서비스 안내 바로 가기)
DOI 인용 스타일