No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A multimedia paediatric cardiology assessment tool for medical students and general paediatric trainees: development and validation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 April 2022
Abstract
Background:
Understanding how cardiovascular structure and physiology guide management is critically important in paediatric cardiology. However, few validated educational tools are available to assess trainee knowledge. To address this deficit, paediatric cardiologists and fellows from four institutions collaborated to develop a multimedia assessment tool for use with medical students and paediatric residents. This tool was developed in support of a novel 3-dimensional virtual reality curriculum created by our group.
Methods:
Educational domains were identified, and questions were iteratively developed by a group of clinicians from multiple centres to assess understanding of key concepts. To evaluate content validity, content experts completed the assessment and reviewed items, rating item relevance to educational domains using a 4-point Likert scale. An item-level content validity index was calculated for each question, and a scale-level content validity index was calculated for the assessment tool, with scores of ≥0.78 and ≥0.90, respectively, representing excellent content validity.
Results:
The mean content expert assessment score was 92% (range 88–97%). Two questions yielded ≤50% correct content expert answers. The item-level content validity index for 29 out of 32 questions was ≥0.78, and the scale-level content validity index was 0.92. Qualitative feedback included suggestions for future improvement. Questions with ≤50% content expert agreement and item-level content validity index scores <0.78 were removed, yielding a 27-question assessment tool.
Conclusions:
We describe a multi-centre effort to create and validate a multimedia assessment tool which may be implemented within paediatric trainee cardiology curricula. Future efforts may focus on content refinement and expansion to include additional educational domains.
- Type
- Original Article
- Information
- Copyright
- © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Fernandes, SM, Sanders, LM. Patient-centered medical home for patients with complex congenital heart disease. Curr Opin Pediatr 2015; 27: 581–586.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mandalenakis, Z, Rosengren, A, Skoglund, K, Lappas, G, Eriksson, P, Dellborg, M. Survivorship in children and young adults with congenital heart disease in Sweden. JAMA Intern Med 2017; 177: 224–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Best, KE, Rankin, J. Long-term survival of individuals born with congenital heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Heart Assoc 2016; 5: e002846.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, TW, Seckeler, MD. Use of 3D models of vascular rings and slings to improve resident education. Congenit Heart Dis 2017; 12: 578–582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harahsheh, AS, Ottolini, M, Lewis, K, Blatt, B, Mitchell, S, Greenberg, L. An innovative pilot curriculum training pediatric residents in referral and communication skills on a cardiology rotation. Acad Pediatr 2016; 16: 700–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mohan, S, Follansbee, C, Nwankwo, U, Hofkosh, D, Sherman, FS, Hamilton, MF. Embedding patient simulation in a pediatric cardiology rotation: a unique opportunity for improving resident education. Congenit Heart Dis 2015; 10: 88–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, TH, Adler, M, Unti, SM, McBride, ME. Pediatric heart disease simulation curriculum: educating the pediatrician. Congenit Heart Dis 2017; 12: 546–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ceresnak, SR, Axelrod, DM, Motonaga, KS, Johnson, ER, Krawczeski, CD. Pediatric cardiology boot camp: description and evaluation of a novel intensive training program for pediatric cardiology trainees. Pediatr Cardiol 2016; 37: 834–844.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, TH, Adler, M, Unti, SM, McBride, ME. Pediatric heart disease simulation curriculum: educating the pediatrician. Congenit Heart Dis 2017; 12: 546–553.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, PA, Taylor, R, Thielke, R, Payne, J, Gonzalez, N, Conde, JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 2009; 42: 377–381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, PA, Taylor, R, Minor, BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform 2019; 95: 103208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polit, DF, Beck, CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2006; 29: 489–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tausch, TJ, Kowalewski, TM, White, LW, McDonough, PS, Brand, TC, Lendvay, TS. Content and construct validation of a robotic surgery curriculum using an electromagnetic instrument tracker. J Urol 2012; 188: 919–923.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Downing, SM. Validity: on the meaningful interpretation of assessment data. Med Educ 2003; 37: 830–837.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costello, JP, Olivieri, LJ, Su, L, et al. Incorporating three-dimensional printing into a simulation-based congenital heart disease and critical care training curriculum for resident physicians. Congenit Heart Dis 2015; 10: 185–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silva, JNA, Southworth, M, Raptis, C, Silva, J. Emerging applications of virtual reality in cardiovascular medicine. JACC Basic Transl Sci 2018; 3: 420–430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rogers, LS, Cohen, MS. Medical education in pediatric and congenital heart disease: a focus on generational learning and technology in education. Prog Pediatr Cardiol 2020; 59: 101305.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanford Children’s Health, Stanford Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital. Stanford pioneers use of VR for patient care, education and experience. Retrieved November 11, 2021, from http://www.stanfordchildrens.org/en/about/news/releases/2017/virtual-reality-program
Google Scholar