A comparison of global ratings and checklist scores from an undergraduate assessment using an anesthesia simulator

To determine the correlation between global ratings and criterion-based checklist scores, and inter-rater reliability of global ratings and criterion-based checklist scores, in a performance assessment using an anesthesia simulator.

All final-year medical students at the University of Toronto were invited to work through a 15-minute faculty-facilitated scenario using an anesthesia simulator. Students' performances were videotaped and analyzed by two faculty using a 25-point criterion-based checklist and a five-point global rating of competency (1 = clear failure, 5 = superior performance). Correlations between global ratings and checklist scores, as well as specific performance competencies (knowledge, technical skills, and judgment), were determined. Checklist and global scores were converted to percentages; means of the two marks were compared. Mean reliability of a single rater for both checklist and global ratings was determined.

The correlation between checklist and global ratings was.74. Mean ratings of both checklist and global scores were low (58.67, SD = 14.96, and 57.08, SD = 24.27, respectively); these differences were not statistically significant. For a single rater, the mean reliability score across rater pairs for checklist scores was.77 (range.58-.93). Mean reliability score across rater pairs for global ratings was.62 (.40-.77). Global ratings correlated more highly with technical skills and judgment (r =.51 and r =.53, respectively) than with knowledge. (r =.24)

Inter-rater reliability was higher for checklist scores than for global ratings; however, global ratings demonstrated acceptable inter-rater reliability and may be useful for competency assessment in performance assessments using simulators.