Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment in Pediatric Simulation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation: Pediatrics

Part of the book series: Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation ((CHS))

Abstract

Assessment is an integral part of the simulation-based learning environment. By enabling us to accurately measure and represent learner performance in the simulated environment, educators can deliver more meaningful predictions of learner performance in the real world. A variety of assessment instrument designs exist suited to different environments, learners, and knowledge constructs. By carefully considering these factors, educators can make informed choices as to the best assessment structure for their program.

The validity of an assessment instrument refers to our ability to successfully argue that it measures the desired construct(s). Validity is an argument constructed from a variety of sources including the tool’s content, the means by which it is scored, its internal structure and psychometric reliability, its relationship to other learner variables and characteristics, and the consequences of the instrument’s use. Before a tool is used, its validity should be rigorously explored in the subject population and educational environment in which it will be used. It must also be recognized that validity is not a property of the tool itself and does not directly transfer between learner groups or purposes.

Educators must take care in choosing the timing of assessment with respect to the simulation and the manner in which feedback will be delivered. A number of instruments suitable to pediatric assessment and simulation have been published. A table of these is included in this chapter. Simulation-based healthcare educators are encouraged to use the principles outlined in this chapter in their selection and implementation of assessment methodologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Scalese R, Hatala R. Competency assessment. In: Levine AI, DeMaria S, Schwartz AD, Sim AJ, editors. The comprehensive textbook of healthcare simulation. New York: Springer; 2013. pp. 135–60.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Harlen W, James M. Assessment and learning: differences and relationships between formative and summative feedback. Assess Educ Princ Policy Pract. 2006;4(3):365–79.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Williams D, Black P. Meanings and consequences: a basis for distinguishing formative and summative functions of assessment? Br Educ Res J. 1996;22(5):537–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mislevy R, Steinberg L, Almond R. Focus article: on the structure of educational assessments. Meas Interdiscip Res Perspect. 2003;1(1):3–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Pellegrino J. Knowing what students know. Issue Sci Technol. 2002–2003;19(2):48–52.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Downing S, Haladyna T. Validity threats: overcoming interference with proposed interpretations of assessment data. Med Educ. 2004;38(3):327–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Downing S. Validity: on meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ. 2003;37(9):830–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kane M. Validation as a pragmatic, scientific activity. J Educ Meas. 2013;50(1):115–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kane M. Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. J Educ Meas. 2013;50(1):1–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Baker D, Gustafson S, Beaubien J, Salas E, Barach P. Medical team training programs in healthcare. In: Henrikson K, Battles JB, Marks ES, Lewin DI, editors. Advances in patient safety: from research to implementation (Vol 4: Programs, Tools, and Products). Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2005. pp. 253–67.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Buljac-Samardzic M, Dekker-van Doorn C, van Wijngaarden J, van Wijk K. Interventions to improve team effectiveness: a systematic review. Health Policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2010;94(3):183–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Eppich W, Howard V, Vozenilek J, Curran I. Simulation-based team training in healthcare. Simul Healthc. 2011;6:14–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Boulet J, Murray D. Review article: assessment in anesthesiology education. Can J Anaesth (Journal canadien d’anesthesie). 2012;59(2):182–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hodges B, Regehr G, McNaughton N, Tiberius R, Hanson M. OSCE checklists do not capture increasing levels of expertise. Acad Med. 1999;74(10):1129–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Abdelshehid C, Quach S, Nelson C, Graversen J, Lusch A, Zarraga J, et al. High-fidelity simulation-based team training in urology: evaluation of technical and nontechnical skills of urology residents during laparoscopic partial nephrectomy. J Surg Educ. 2013;70(5):588–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Boon W, McAllister J, Attar M, Chapman R, Mullan P, Haftel H. Evaluation of heart rate assessment timing, communication, accuracy, and clinical decision-making during high fidelity simulation of neonatal resuscitation. Int J Pediatr. 2014;2014:927430.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Spanager L, Beier-Holgersen R, Dieckmann P, Konge L, Rosenberg J, Oestergaard D. Reliable assessment of general surgeons’ non-technical skills based on video-recordings of patient simulated scenarios. Am J Surg. 2013;206(5):810–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Tobler K, Grant E, Marczinski C. Evaluation of the Impact of a simulation-enhanced breaking bad news workshop in pediatrics. Simul Healthc. 2014;9(4):213–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Calhoun A, Boone M, Miller K, Taulbee R, Montgomery V, Boland K. A multirater instrument for the assessment of simulated pediatric crises. J Grad Med Educ. 2011;3(1):88–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. McEvoy M, Butler B, MacCarrick G. Teaching professionalism through virtual means. Clin Teach. 2012;9(1):32–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ponton-Carss A, Hutchison C, Violato C. Assessment of communication, professionalism, and surgical skills in an objective structured performance-related examination (OSPRE): a psychometric study. Am J Surg. 2011;202(4):433–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sigalet E, Donnon T, Cheng A, Cooke S, Robinson T, Bissett W, et al. Development of a team performance scale to assess undergraduate health professionals. Acad Med. 2013;88(7):989–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Cheng A, Auerbach M, Hunt E, Chang T, Pusic M, Nadkarni V, et al. Designing and conducting simulation-based research. Pediatrics. 2014;133(6):1091–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cheng A, Hunt E, Donoghue A, Nelson-McMillan K, Nishisaki A, Leflore J, et al. Examining pediatric resuscitation education using simulation and scripted debriefing: a multicenter randomized trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2013;167(6):528–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Donoghue A, Ventre K, Boulet J, Brett-Fleegler M, Nishisaki A, Overly F, et al. Design, implementation, and psychometric analysis of a scoring instrument for simulated pediatric resuscitation: a report from the EXPRESS pediatric investigators. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(2):71–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Feldman M, Lazzara E, Vanderbilt A, DiazGranados D. Rater training to support high-stakes simulation-based assessments. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2012;32(4):279–86.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Gorman C, Rentsch J. Evaluating frame-of-reference rater training effectiveness using performance schema accuracy. J Appl Psychol. 2009;94(5):1336–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Holmboe E, Ward D, Reznick R, Katsufrakis P, Leslie K, Patel V, et al. Faculty development in assessment: the missing link in competency-based medical education. Acad Med. 2011;86(4):460–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Calhoun A, Rider E, Meyer E, Lamiani G, Truog R. Assessment of communication skills and self-appraisal in the simulated environment: feasibility of multirater feedback with gap analysis. Simul Healthc. 2009;4(1):22–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Foster C, Law M. How many perspectives provide a compass? Differentiating 360-degree and multi-source feedback. Int J Select Assess. 2006;14(3):288–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lockyer J. Multisource feedback in the assessment of physician competencies. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2003;23(1):4–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 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(10 Suppl 1):S82–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Calhoun A, Rider E, Peterson E, Meyer E. Multi-rater feedback with gap analysis: an innovative means to assess communication skill and self-insight. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;80(3):321–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lipner R, Blank L, Leas B, Fortna G. The value of patient and peer ratings in recertification. Acad Med. 2002;77(Suppl 10):S64–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rider E, Nawotniak R. A practical guide to teaching and assessing the ACGME core competencies. 2nd ed. Marblehead: HC pro; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Eva K, Regehr G. Self-assessment in the health professions: a reformulation and research agenda. Acad Med. 2005;80(Suppl 10):S46–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Eva K, Regehr G. Knowing when to look it up: a new conception of self-assessment ability. Acad Med. 2007;82(Suppl 10):S81–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Stufflebeam D. Guidelines for developing evaluation checklists: the checklists development checklist (CDC). 2000. http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/archive_checklists/guidelines_cdc.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2014.

  40. Nishisaki A, Donoghue A, Colborn S, Watson C, Meyer A, Niles D, et al. Development of an instrument for a primary airway provider’s performance with an ICU multidisciplinary team in pediatric respiratory failure using simulation. Respir Care. 2012;57(7):1121–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Donoghue A, Nishisaki A, Sutton R, Hales R, Boulet J. Reliability and validity of a scoring instrument for clinical performance during pediatric advanced life support simulation scenarios. Resuscitation. 2010;81(3):331–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Ventre K, Collingridge D, DeCarlo D. End-user evaluations of a personal computer-based pediatric advanced life support simulator. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(3):134–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pena A. The Dreyfus model of clinical problem-solving skills acquisition: a critical perspective. Med Educ Online. 2010;15. doi:10.3402/meo.v15i0.4846.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Kingstrom P, Bass A. A critical analysis of studies comparing behaviorally anchored rating scales and other rating formats. Pers Psychol. 1981;34(2):263–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Donoghue A, Durbin D, Nadel F, Stryjewski G, Kost S, Nadkarni V. Effect of high-fidelity simulation on pediatric advanced life support training in pediatric house staff: a randomized trial. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2009;25(3):139–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Messick S. Meaning and values in test validation: the science and ethics of assessment. Educ Res. 1989;18(2):5–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Shavelson R, Webb N. Generalizability theory: a primer. Newbury Park: Sage Publications; 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Cook D, Hatala R. Got power? A systematic review of sample size adequacy in health professions education research. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Brennan R. Commentary on “validating the interpretations and uses of test scores”. J Educ Meas. 2013;50(1):74–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Downing S, Yudkowski R. Assessment in health professions education. New York: Routledge; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Novack D, Dube C, Goldstein M. Teaching medical interviewing: a basic course on interviewing and the physician-patient relationship. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152(9):1814–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Cook D, Beckman T. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. Am J Med. 2006;119(2):166.e7–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Fanning R, Gaba D. The role of debriefing in simulation-based learning. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(2):115–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Issenberg S, McGaghie W, Petrusa E. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review. Med Teach. 2005;27(1):10–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Rudolph J, Simon R, Dufresne R, Raemer D. There’s no such thing as “nonjudgmental” debriefing: a theory and method for debriefing with good judgment. Simul Healthc. 2006;1(1):49–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Group SB. Studiocode solutions for healthcare 2014. 2014. http://www.studiocodegroup.com/solutions/healthcare/highlights/.

  57. Healthcare C. Metivision 2013. 2013. http://www.caehealthcare.com/eng/center-management/metivision. Accessed 2 June 2014.

  58. Medical L. Laerdal 2014. 2014. http://www.laerdal.com/us/. Accessed 1 June 2014.

  59. Raemer D, Anderson M, Cheng, Fanning R, Nadkarni V, Savoldelli G. Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(7):S52–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Leslie J, Fleenor J. Feedback to managers: a review and comparison of multi-rater instruments for management development. 3rd ed. Greensboro: Center for Creative Leadershio; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Overeem K, Lombarts K, Arah O, Klazinga N, Grol R, Wollersheim H. Three methods of multi-source feedback compared: a plea for narrative comments and coworkers’ perspectives. Med Teach. 2010;32(2):141–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Bell B, Cowie B. Formative assessment and science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Examiners NBoM. Step 2 clinical skills (CS) content description and general information. 2014. http://www.usmle.org/pdfs/step-2-cs/cs-info-manual.pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2014.

  64. Weller J, Frengley R, Torrie J, Shulruf B, Jolly B, Hopley L, et al. Evaluation of an instrument to measure teamwork in multidisciplinary critical care teams. BMJ Qual Saf. 2011;20(3):216–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Cooper S, Cant R, Porter J, Sellick K, Somers G, Kinsman L, et al. Rating medical emergency teamwork performance: development of the team emergency assessment measure (TEAM). Resuscitation. 2010;81(4):446–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Flowerdew L, Brown R, Vincent C, Woloshynowych M. Development and validation of a tool to assess emergency physicians’ nontechnical skills. Ann Emerg Med. 2012;59(5):376–85.e4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Steinemann S, Berg B, DiTullio A, Skinner A, Terada K, Anzelon K, et al. Assessing teamwork in the trauma bay: introduction of a modified “NOTECHS” scale for trauma. Am J Surg. 2012;203(1):69–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Plant J, van Schaik S, Sliwka D, Boscardin C, O’Sullivan P. Validation of a self-efficacy instrument and its relationship to performance of crisis resource management skills. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2011;16(5):579–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Malec J, Torsher L, Dunn W, Wiegmann D, Arnold J, Brown D, et al. The mayo high performance teamwork scale: reliability and validity for evaluating key crew resource management skills. Simul Healthc. 2007;2(1):4–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Frankel A, Gardner R, Maynard L, Kelly A. Using the communication and teamwork skills (CATS) assessment to measure health care team performance. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2007;33(9):549–58.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Walker S, Brett S, McKay A, Lambden S, Vincent C, Sevdalis N. Observational skill-based clinical assessment tool for resuscitation (OSCAR): development and validation. Resuscitation. 2011;82(7):835–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Sutton G, Liao J, Jimmieson N, Restubog S. Measuring multidisciplinary team effectiveness in a ward-based healthcare setting: development of the team functioning assessment tool. J Healthc Qual. 2011;33(3):10–23. quiz–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Sutton G, Liao J, Jimmieson N, Restubog S. Measuring ward-based multidisciplinary healthcare team functioning: a validation study of the team functioning assessment tool (TFAT). J Healthc Qual. 2013;35(4):36–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Grant E, Grant V, Bhanji F, Duff J, Cheng A, Lockyer J. The development and assessment of an evaluation tool for pediatric resident competence in leading simulated pediatric resuscitations. Resuscitation. 2012;83(7):887–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Lambden S, DeMunter C, Dowson A, Cooper M, Gautama S, Sevdalis N. The imperial paediatric emergency training toolkit (IPETT) for use in paediatric emergency training: development and evaluation of feasibility and validity. Resuscitation. 2013;84(6):831–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Reid J, Stone K, Brown J, Caglar D, Kobayashi A, Lewis-Newby M, et al. The simulation team assessment tool (STAT): development, reliability and validation. Resuscitation. 2012;83(7):879–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Patterson P, Weaver M, Weaver S, Rosen M, Todorova G, Weingart L, et al. Measuring teamwork and conflict among emergency medical technician personnel. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2012;16(1):98–108.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Gilfoyle E, Gottesman R, Razack S. Development of a leadership skills workshop in paediatric advanced resuscitation. Med Teach. 2007;29(9):e276–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Brett-Fleegler M, Vinci R, Weiner DA. A simulator-based tool that assesses pediatric resident resuscitation competency. Pediatrics. 2008;121(3):e597–603.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Adler M, Vozenilek J, Trainor J, Eppich W, Wang E, Beaumont J, et al. Comparison of checklist and anchored global rating instruments for performance rating of simulated pediatric emergencies. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(1):18–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. van der Heide P, van Toledo-Eppinga L, van der Heide M, van der Lee J. Assessment of neonatal resuscitation skills: a reliable and valid scoring system. Resuscitation. 2006;71(2):212–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Lockyer J, Singhal N, Fidler H, Weiner G, Aziz K, Curran V. The development and testing of a performance checklist to assess neonatal resuscitation megacode skill. Pediatrics. 2006;118(6):e1739–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Fehr J, Boulet J, Waldrop W, Snider R, Brockel M, Murray D. Simulation-based assessment of pediatric anesthesia skills. Anesthesiology. 2011;115(6):1308–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Sawyer T, Sierocka-Castaneda A, Chan D, Berg B, Lustik M, Thompson M. Deliberate practice using simulation improves neonatal resuscitation performance. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(6):327–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Oriot D, Darrieux E, Boureau-Voultoury A, Ragot S, Scepi M. Validation of a performance assessment scale for simulated intraosseous access. Simul Healthc. 2012;7(3):171–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Thomas S, Burch W, Kuehnle S, Flood R, Scalzo A, Gerard J. Simulation training for pediatric residents on central venous catheter placement: a pilot study. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2013;14(9):e416–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Barsuk J, McGaghie W, Cohen E, Jayshankar S, Wayne D. Use of simulation-based mastery learning to improve the quality of central venous catheter placement in a medical intensive care unit. J Hosp Med. 2009;4(7):397–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Kessler D, Auerbach M, Pusic M, Tunik M, Foltin J. A randomized trial of simulation-based deliberate practice for infant lumbar puncture skills. Simul Healthc. 2011;6(4):197–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Gaies M, Morris S, Hafler J, Graham D, Capraro A, Zhou J, et al. Reforming procedural skills training for pediatric residents: a randomized, interventional trial. Pediatrics. 2009;124(2):610–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Kilbane B, Adler M, Trainor J. Pediatric residents’ ability to perform a lumbar puncture: evaluation of an educational intervention. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2010;26(8):558–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Lammers R, Temple K, Wagner M, Ray D. Competence of new emergency medicine residents in the performance of lumbar punctures. Acad Emerg Med. 2005;12(7):622–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Stein T, Frankel R, Krupat E. Enhancing clinician communication skills in a large healthcare organization: a longitudinal case study. Patient Educ Couns. 2005;58(1):4–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Lang F, McCord R, Harvill L, Anderson D. Communication assessment using the common ground instrument: psychometric properties. Fam Med. 2004;36(3):189–98.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Kurtz S. Teaching and learning communication in veterinary medicine. J Vet Med Educ. 2006;33(1):11–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Stewart M, Brown J, Weston W, McWhinney I, MCWilliam C, Freeman T. Patient-centered medicine: transforming the clinical method. 2nd ed. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Makoul G, Krupat E, Chang C. Measuring patient views of physician communication skills: development and testing of the communication assessment tool. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;67(3):333–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Stevens D, King D, Laponis R, Hanley K, Zabar S, Kalet A, et al. Medical students retain pain assessment and management skills long after an experiential curriculum: a controlled study. Pain. 2009;145(3):319–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Smith R. Patient centered interviewing: an evidence based method. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Makoul G. The SEGUE Framework for teaching and assessing communication skills. Patient Educ Couns. 2001;45(1):23–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Haidet P, Kelly P, Chou C, Curriculum ftC, Group CS. Characterizing the patient-centeredness of hidden curricula in medical schools: development and validation of a new measure. Acad Med. 2005;80(1):44–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Shmutz J, Eppich W, Hoffman F, Heimberg E, Manser T. Five steps to develop checklists for evaluating clinical performance: an integrative approach. Acad Med. 2014;89(7):1–10.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Critical Care, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Kosair Children’s Hospital, Louisville, KY, USA

    Aaron William Calhoun MD

  2. Department of Pediatrics and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine and Critical Care Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine of the University of Pennsylvania, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Aaron Donoghue MD, MSCE

  3. Department of Pediatrics and Medical Education, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

    Mark Adler MD

  4. Department of Pediatrics, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA

    Mark Adler MD

Authors
  1. Aaron William Calhoun MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron Donoghue MD, MSCE
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mark Adler MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aaron William Calhoun MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. KidSIM(TM) Pediatric Simulation Program, Alberta Children's Hospital, CALGARY, Alberta, Canada

    Vincent J. Grant

  2. KidSIM-ASPIRE Simulation Research Prgm, Alberta Children's Hospital, CALGARY, Alberta, Canada

    Adam Cheng

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Calhoun, A., Donoghue, A., Adler, M. (2016). Assessment in Pediatric Simulation. In: Grant, V., Cheng, A. (eds) Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation: Pediatrics. Comprehensive Healthcare Simulation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24187-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24187-6_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-24185-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-24187-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation