title: How does the medical graduates' self-assessment of their clinical competency differ from experts' assessment?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The assessment of the performance of medical school graduates during their first postgraduate years provides an early indicator of the quality of the undergraduate curriculum and educational process. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical competency of medical graduates, as perceived by the graduates themselves and by the experts.
  
  
  METHODS
  This is a hospital based cross-sectional study. It covered 105 medical graduates and 63 experts selected by convenient sampling method. A self-administered questionnaire covering the different areas of clinical competency constructed on a five-point Likert scale was used for data collection. Data processing and analysis were performed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 16.0. The mean, frequency distribution, and percentage of the variables were calculated. A non-parametric Kruskal Wallis test was applied to verify whether the graduates' and experts' assessments were influenced by the graduates' variables such as age, gender, experience, type of hospital, specialty and location of work at a (p ≤ 0.05) level of significance.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The overall mean scores for experts' and graduates' assessments were 3.40 and 3.63, respectively (p= 0.035). Almost 87% of the graduates perceived their competency as good and very good in comparison with only 67.7% by experts. Female and male graduates who rated themselves as very good were 33.8% and 25% respectively. More than 19% of the graduates in the age group > 30 years perceived their clinical competency as inadequate in contrast with only 6.2% of the graduates in the youngest age group. Experts rated 40% of the female graduates as inadequate versus 20% of males, (p= 0.04). More than 40% of the graduates in younger age group were rated by experts as inadequate, versus 9.7% of the higher age group >30 years (p = 0.03).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  There was a wide discrepancy between the graduates' self-assessment and experts' assessment, particularly in the level of inadequate performance. Graduates in general, and those of younger age groups in particular, tend to overestimate their clinical skills and competency.
authors: Community Medicine and Public Health Department, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Aden, Aden, Yemen. fatema_talib@yahoo.com
authors: Fatima Taleb
authors: FT
authors: Abadel
authors: Abdulla Saeed
authors: AS
authors: Hattab
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000367:Age Factors; D002983:Clinical Competence / Q000592:standards*; D018592:Cross-Over Studies; D004521:Educational Measurement; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D010820:Physicians / Q000523:psychology / Q000592:standards*; D012647:Self-Assessment; D012737:Sex Factors; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires
references: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2002;7(1):63-80
references: 11912336
references: Med Educ. 2004 Apr;38(4):378-89
references: 15025639
references: Ann Intern Med. 2004 Jun 1;140(11):874-81
references: 15172901
references: Med Teach. 2002 Mar;24(2):130-5
references: 12098431
references: BMC Med Educ. 2010 May 20;10:35
references: 20487536
references: Am J Surg. 2003 Apr;185(4):319-22
references: 12657382
references: Med Educ. 2002 Jun;36(6):534-9
references: 12047667
references: BMC Med Educ. 2011 Nov 24;11:99
references: 22114989
references: JAMA. 2006 Sep 6;296(9):1094-102
references: 16954489
references: Acad Med. 2004 Jun;79(6):549-56
references: 15165974
references: Acad Med. 2001 Oct;76(10 Suppl):S87-9
references: 11597883
references: Acad Med. 2004 May;79(5):458-63
references: 15107286
references: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2004;9(3):211-24
references: 15316272
references: JAMA. 2006 Sep 6;296(9):1137-9
references: 16954495
references: BMC Med Educ. 2012 Mar 19;12:10
references: 22429317
references: Arch Intern Med. 1987 Nov;147(11):1957-60
references: 3675097
references: Am J Med. 2005 Feb;118(2):189-94
references: 15694907
references: Am J Surg. 2003 Apr;185(4):323-7
references: 12657383
references: BMC Med Educ. 2009 Apr 13;9:16
references: 19364401
references: Acad Med. 2005 Oct;80(10 Suppl):S46-54
references: 16199457
references: Med Teach. 2007 Sep;29(7):648-54
references: 18236251
references: Med Educ. 2002 May;36(5):472-8
references: 12028398
references: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1999 Dec;77(6):1121-34
references: 10626367
references: Acad Med. 2010 Apr;85(4):647-53
references: 20354381
references: JAMA. 2002 Nov 27;288(20):2609-14
references: 12444870