Blinded Versus Unblinded Evaluation: Effects on Student Clinical Performance Ratings.

Area of Science:

• Physical Therapy Education
• Clinical Assessment
• Medical Education Research

Background:

• Student performance assessment is susceptible to various biases.
• Objective evaluation by clinical instructors (CIs) is crucial for student growth.
• Timely, accurate, and unbiased feedback is essential for clinical education.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare student and CI ratings on the Clinical Internship Evaluation Tool (CIET).
• To investigate the impact of CIs viewing student self-assessments on their ratings.
• To identify potential biases in student performance evaluations.

Main Methods:

• 176 Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) students and 93 CIs participated across two cohorts.
• Students and CIs completed the CIET at midterm and final points of an 8-week clinical experience.
• Cohort 1 CIs viewed student ratings; Cohort 2 CIs were blinded to student ratings.

Main Results:

• CIET ratings for professional behavior and patient management improved over time in both cohorts.
• Differences between student and CI ratings were greater in the blinded cohort (Cohort 2).
• A significant interaction indicated larger discrepancies in patient management items when CIs were blinded.

Conclusions:

• CI access to student self-assessments may affect rating alignment on the CIET.
• Clinical instructors tend to rate students lower when blinded to self-assessments.
• Viewing student self-assessments may introduce bias into CI evaluations of student performance.