Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The mini-PAT as a multi-source feedback tool for trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry: Assessing whether it is fit for purpose

  • Gill Salmon (a1) and Lesley Pugsley (a2)
Summary

This paper discusses the research supporting the use of multi-source feedback (MSF) for doctors and describes the mini-Peer Assessment Tool (mini-PAT), the MSF instrument currently used to assess trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry. The relevance of issues raised in the literature about MSF tools in general is examined in relation to trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry as well as the appropriateness of the mini-PAT for this group. Suggestions for change including modifications to existing MSF tools or the development of a specialty-specific MSF instrument are offered.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The mini-PAT as a multi-source feedback tool for trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry: Assessing whether it is fit for purpose
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The mini-PAT as a multi-source feedback tool for trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry: Assessing whether it is fit for purpose
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The mini-PAT as a multi-source feedback tool for trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry: Assessing whether it is fit for purpose
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an open-access article published by the Royal College of Psychiatrists and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Gill Salmon (Gill.Salmon@wales.nhs.uk)
Footnotes
Hide All

Declaration of interest

None.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
1 Holsgrove, G. Multisource feedback (360-degree assessment). In Workplace-Based Assessments in Psychiatry (eds Bhugra, D, Malik, A, Brown, N): 65–9. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2007.
2 Lipner, RS, Blank, LL, Leas, BF, Fortna, GS. The value of patient and peer ratings in recertification. Acad Med 2002; 77: 64–6.
3 Abdulla, A. A critical analysis of mini peer assessment tool (mini- PAT). J R Soc Med 2008; 101: 22–6.
4 Fitch, C, Malik, A, Lelliott, P, Bhugra, D, Andiappan, M. Assessing psychiatric competencies: what does the literature tell us about workplace-based assessment? Adv Psychiatr Treat 2008; 14: 122–30.
5 Ramsey, PG, Wenrich, MD, Carline, JD, Inui, TS, Larson, EB, LoGerfo, JP. Use of peer ratings to evaluate physician performance. JAMA 1993; 13: 1655–60.
6 Archer, J, Norcini, J, Southgate, L, Heard, S, Davies, H. Mini-PAT (Peer Assessment Tool): a valid component of a national assessment programme in the UK. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2008; 13: 181–92.
7 Hall, W, Violato, C, Lewkonia, R, Lockyer, J, Fidler, H, Toews, J, et al. Assessment of physician performance in Alberta: The Physician Achievement Review. CMAJ 1999; 161: 52–7.
8 Lockyer, J, Blackmore, D, Fidler, H, Crutcher, R, Salter, B, Shaw, K, et al. A study of a multisource feedback system for international medical graduates holding defined licenses. Med Educ 2006; 40: 340–7.
9 Violato, C, Lockyer, J, Fidler, H. Multisource feedback: a method of assessing surgical practice. BMJ 2003; 326: 546–8.
10 Evans, R, Elwyn, G, Edwards, A. A review of instruments for peer assessment of physicians. BMJ 2004; 328: 1240–3.
11 Travaglia, J, Debono, D. Peer Review in Medicine: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature. Centre for Clinical Governance Research in Health, University of New South Wales, 2009.
12 Dubinsky, I, Jennings, K, Greengarten, M, Brans, A. 360-degree physician assessment. Healthc Q 2010; 13: 71–6.
13 Andrews, JJ, Violato, C, Ansari, A, Donnon, T, Pugliese, G. Assessing psychologists in practice: lessons from health professionals using multisource feedback. Prof Psychol Res Pract 2013; 44: 193207.
14 Khalifa, K, Ansari, A, Violato, C, Donnon, T. Multisource feedback to assess surgical practice: a systematic review. J Surg Educ 2013; 70: 475–86.
15 Donnon, T, Ansari, A, Alawi, A, Violato, C. The reliability, validity, and feasibility of multisource feedback physician assessment: a systematic review. Acad Med 2014; 89: 511616.
16 Davies, H, Archer, J, Southgate, L, Norcini, J. Initial evaluation of the first year of the Foundation Assessment Programme. Med Educ 2009; 43: 7481.
17 Carr, S. The Foundation Programme assessment tools: an opportunity to enhance feedback to trainees? Postgrad Med J 2006; 82: 576–9.
18 General Medical Council. Good Medical Practice. GMC, 2001.
19 Archer, J, Norcini, J, Davies, H. Use of SPRAT for peer review of paediatricians in training. BMJ 2005; 330: 1251–3.
20 Davis, H, Archer, J. Multi source feedback: development and practical aspects. Clin Teach 2005; 2: 7781.
21 Archer, J, McGraw, M, Davies, H. Assuring the validity of multisource feedback in a national programme. Arch Dis Child 2010; 95: 330–5.
22 Searle, G, Holsgrove, G, Brown, N. Trainees' Guide to Workplace Based Assessment (Version 2.0). Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2007 (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/pdf/Trainees_Guide_to_WPBA_070629.pdf).
23 Holsgrove, G. Guide to the mini-Peer Assessment Tool (mini-PAT): An Introduction for Trainees, Assessors and Educational Supervisors.Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2006.
24 Violato, C, Marini, A, Toews, J, Lockyer, J, Fidler, H. Feasibility and psychometric properties of using peers, consulting physicians, co-workers and patients to assess physicians. Acad Med 1997; 72: S824.
25 Durning, SJ, Cation, LJ, Markert, RJ, Pangaraaro, LN. Assessing the reliability and validity of the mini-clinical evaluation exercise for internal medicine residency training. Acad Med 2002; 77: 900–4.
26 Bullock, AD, Hassell, A, Markham, WA, Wall, D, Whitehouse, A. How ratings may vary by staff group in multisource feedback assessment of junior doctors. Med Educ 2009; 43: 516–20.
27 Johnson, D, Bibiana, C. Comparison of self, nurse, and physician assessment of residents rotating through an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med 1998; 26: 1811–6.
28 Thomas, PA, Gebo, KA, Hellmann, DB. A pilot study of peer review in residency training. J Gen Intern Med 1999; 14: 551–4.
29 Violato, C, Lockyer, J. Self and peer assessment of pediatricians, psychiatrists and medicine specialists: implications for self-directed learning. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2006; 11: 235–44.
30 Sargeant, J, Mann, K, Sinclair, D, van der Vleuten, C, Metsemakers, J. Challenges in multisource feedback: intended and unintended outcomes. Med Educ 2007; 41: 583–91.
31 Overeem, K, Wollersheim, H, Driessen, E, Lombarts, K, van de Ven, G, Grol, R, et al. Doctors' perceptions of why 360-degree feedback does (not) work: a qualitative study. Med Educ 2009; 43: 874–82.
32 Miller, A, Archer, J. Impact of workplace based assessment on doctors' education and performance: a systematic review. BMJ 2010; 341: c5064.
33 Weinrich, MD, Carline, ID, Giles, LM, Ramsey, PG. Ratings of the performance of practicing internists by hospital-based registered nurses. Acad Med 1993; 68: 680–7.
34 Higgins, RSD, Bridges, J, Burke, JM, O'Donnell, MA, Cohen, N, Wilkes, SB. Implementing the ACGME general competencies in a cardiothoracic surgery residency program using a 360-degree feedback. Ann Thorac Surg 2004; 77: 1217.
35 Ferguson, J, Wakeling, J, Bowie, P. Factors influencing the effectiveness of multisource feedback in improving professional practice of medical doctors: a systematic review. BMC Med Educ 2014; 14: 76.
36 Wilkinson, JR, Crossley, JG, Wragg, A, Mills, P, Cowan, G, Wade, W. Implementing workplace-based assessment across medical specialties in the United Kingdom. Med Educ 2008; 42: 364–73.
37 Donaldson, L. Trust, Assurance and Safety - The Regulation of Health Professionals in the 21st Century. Department of Health, 2007.
38 Violato, C, Lockyer, J. An examination of the appropriateness of using a common peer assessment instrument to assess physician skills across specialties. Acad Med 2004; 79: S58.
39 Mackillop, L, Crossley, J, Vivekananda-Schmidt, P, Wade, W, Armitage, M. A single generic multisource feedback tool for revalidation of all career-grade doctors: does one size fit all? Med Teach 2011; 33: e7583.
40 Davies, H, Archer, J, Bateman, A, Dewar, S, Crossley, J, Grant, J, et al. Specialty-specific multisource feedback: assuring validity, informing training. Med Educ 2008; 42: 1014–20.
41 Royal College of Psychiatrists. A Competency Based Curriculum for Specialist Training in Psychiatry: Specialists in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2013.
42 Lelliott, P, Williams, R, Mears, A, Andiappan, M, Owen, H, Reading, P, et al. Questionnaire for 360-degree assessment of consultant psychiatrists: development and psychometric properties. Br J Psych 2008; 193: 156–60.
43 Violato, C, Lockyer, J, Fidler, H. Assessment of psychiatrists in practice through multisource feedback. Can J Psych 2008; 53: 525–33.
44 American Board of Pediatrics. Appendix F: Professionalism. In Program Director's Guide to the ABP: Resident Evaluation, Tracking and Certification. American Board of Pediatrics, 2003.
45 Fallat, M, Glover, G, American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Bioethics. Professionalism in pediatrics. Pediatrics 2007; 120: e112333.
46 Wright, C, Richards, S, Hill, J, Roberts, M, Norman, G, Greco, M, et al. Multisource feedback in evaluating the performance of doctors: the example of the UK General Medical Council patient and colleague questionnaires. Acad Med 2012; 87: 1668–78.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 2056-4694
  • EISSN: 2056-4708
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 27 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 128 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 19th June 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

The mini-PAT as a multi-source feedback tool for trainees in child and adolescent psychiatry: Assessing whether it is fit for purpose

  • Gill Salmon (a1) and Lesley Pugsley (a2)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *