BACKGROUND Even in anonymous evaluations of a postgraduate medical education (PGME) program, residents may be reluctant to provide an honest evaluation of their PGME program, because they fear embarrassment or repercussions from their supervisors if their anonymity as a respondent is endangered. This study was set up to test the hypothesis that current residents in a PGME program provide more positive evaluations of their PGME program than residents having completed it. We therefore compared PGME learning environment evaluations of current residents in the program to leaving residents having completed it. METHODS This observational study used data gathered routinely in the quality cycle of PGME programs at two Dutch teaching hospitals to test our hypothesis. At both hospitals, all current PGME residents are requested to complete the Scan of Postgraduate Education Environment Domains (SPEED) annually. Residents leaving the hospital after completion of the PGME program are also asked to complete the SPEED after an exit interview with the hospital's independent residency coordinator. All SPEED evaluations are collected and analysed anonymously. We compared the residents' grades (on a continuous scale ranging from 0 (poor) to 10 (excellent)) on the three SPEED domains (content, atmosphere, and organization of the program) and their mean (overall department grade) between current and leaving residents. RESULTS Mean (SD) overall SPEED department grades were 8.00 (0.52) for 287 current residents in 39 PGME programs and 8.07 (0.48) for 170 leaving residents in 39 programs. Neither the overall SPEED department grades (t test, p = 0.53, 95% CI for difference - 0.16 to 0.31) nor the department SPEED domain grades (MANOVA, F(3, 62) = 0.79, p = 0.51) were significantly different between current and leaving residents. CONCLUSIONS Residents leaving the program did not provide more critical evaluations of their PGME learning environment than current residents in the program. This suggests that current residents' evaluations of their postgraduate learning environment were not affected by social desirability bias or fear of repercussions from faculty.

中文翻译：

---

居民对其研究生医学教育学习环境的评估的可靠性：一项观察性研究。

背景技术即使在对研究生医学教育（PGME）计划进行匿名评估的过程中，居民也可能不愿意对其PGME计划进行诚实的评估，因为如果他们的匿名身份被威胁，他们会害怕上司的尴尬或反感。进行这项研究的目的是检验以下假设：PGME计划中的当前居民对他们的PGME计划的评价要比完成该计划的居民更积极。因此，我们比较了该计划中当前居民的PGME学习环境评估与完成该计划的居民之间的比较。方法这项观察性研究使用了两家荷兰教学医院在PGME程序质量周期中常规收集的数据来检验我们的假设。在两家医院 要求所有当前PGME居民每年完成“研究生教育环境领域扫描（SPEED）”。在完成PGME计划后离开医院的居民，在与医院的独立住院医师进行面试后，也被要求完成SPEED。所有SPEED评估均被收集并匿名分析。我们比较了三个SPEED领域（项目的内容，氛围和组织）的居民等级（连续等级，范围从0（差）到10（优秀））及其当前和之后的平均值（部门总体等级）。离开居民。结果39个PGME计划中的287名当前居民的平均（SD）总体SPEED部门等级为8.00（0.52），而39个计划中的170名离开的居民的平均（SD）等级为8.07（0.48）。总体SPEED部门等级（t检验，p = 0.53，差异的95％CI-0.16至0.31）和部门SPEED领域等级（MANOVA，F（3，62）= 0.79，p = 0.51）都没有显着差异当前和即将离开的居民。结论离开该计划的居民没有对他们的PGME学习环境提供比目前该计划中的居民更为严格的评估。这表明当前的居民对其研究生学习环境的评估不受社会期望偏差或教师影响的恐惧影响。结论离开该计划的居民没有对他们的PGME学习环境提供比目前该计划中的居民更为严格的评估。这表明，目前的居民对其研究生学习环境的评估不受社会期望偏差或教师影响的恐惧影响。结论离开该计划的居民没有对他们的PGME学习环境提供比目前该计划中的居民更为严格的评估。这表明当前的居民对其研究生学习环境的评估不受社会期望偏差或教师影响的恐惧影响。