Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Examiner differences in the mini-CEX.

J J Norcini1, L L Blank, G K Arnold

  • 1American Board of Internal Medicine, 510 Walnut St., Philadelphia, PA 19106, USA. jnorcini@abim.org

Advances in Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice
|January 1, 1997
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Preface.

Journal of general internal medicine·2016
Same author

The effects of modeling and cognitive induction on the moral reasoning of adolescents.

Journal of youth and adolescence·2013
Same author

Measuring the effects of an international health professions faculty development fellowship: the FAIMER Institute.

Medical teacher·2010
Same author

Capacity building in medical education and health outcomes in developing countries: the missing link.

Education for health (Abingdon, England)·2007
Same author

The relationship between competence and performance: implications for assessing practice performance.

Medical education·2002
Same author

Conceptual challenges in tailoring physician performance assessment to individual practice.

Medical education·2002
Same journal

Decision-making in programmatic assessment is only a challenge when we make it one.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2026
Same journal

Historicizing health professions education research: history as a strategic analytic resource.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2026
Same journal

Factors influencing workplace collaboration and learning between resident doctors and senior nurses: a scoping review.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2026
Same journal

Grave lessons: a guide to historiographical research in health professions education.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2026
Same journal

A scoping review of inquiry in medicine and nursing using Dewey's perspective.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2026
Same journal

"Teaching is important, but it's not important": a qualitative study of teacher identity among early-career academics in health professions.

Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice·2026
See all related articles

The mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (mini-CEX) provides consistent resident evaluations across different settings and examiners. Faculty were satisfied with this assessment format, indicating its value for local-level medical education.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Education
  • Clinical Assessment
  • Resident Training

Background:

  • The mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (mini-CEX) is a tool used for assessing resident performance.
  • Variability in faculty stringency and clinical setting influence can affect assessment validity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To determine if faculty ratings in the mini-CEX format vary by examiner stringency or clinical setting.
  • To assess faculty satisfaction with the mini-CEX format.

Main Methods:

  • Faculty observed residents during focused history and physical examinations in inpatient, outpatient, or emergency settings.
  • Faculty provided ratings and feedback after discussing diagnosis and treatment plans.
  • Data from 355 mini-CEX encounters involving 88 residents and 64 attending physicians were analyzed.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Examiner ratings showed minimal differences in stringency.
  • Ratings were consistent across different training programs and clinical settings (inpatient, outpatient, emergency room).
  • Faculty reported general satisfaction with the mini-CEX format, correlating with resident perceptions.

Conclusions:

  • The mini-CEX is adaptable to various clinical situations, yielding comparable scores across different examiners and settings.
  • The mini-CEX is a valuable tool for local-level resident evaluation in medical training programs.