Consistency between inter-institutional panels using a three-level Angoff-standard setting in licensure tests of foreign-trained dentists in Sweden: A cohort study.

Autor: Dalum J; Department of Dental Medicine, Division of Oral Diagnostics and Rehabilitation, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden., Paulsson L; Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden., Christidis N; Department of Dental Medicine, Division of Oral Diagnostics and Rehabilitation, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden., Andersson Franko M; Department of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden., Karlgren K; Department Learning, Informatics, Management and Ethics, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.; Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway., Leanderson C; Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden., Sandborgh-Englund G; Department of Dental Medicine, Division of Oral Diagnostics and Rehabilitation, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: PloS one [PLoS One] 2024 Nov 08; Vol. 19 (11), pp. e0313476. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Nov 08 (Print Publication: 2024).
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0313476
Abstrakt: Licensure exams play a crucial role in ensuring the competence of individuals entering a profession, thereby safeguarding the public and maintaining the quality and integrity of the profession. In Sweden, dentists educated outside the European Union seeking to practise dentistry must undergoa re-certification process. The re-certification process includes a theoretical examination where pass marks are set using a three-level Angoff method. This study aimed to determine the consistency of the Angoff ratings using independent panels at two Swedish universities. Two cohorts of panellists were included in the study: one reference and one external. The reference panel was responsible for rating the upcoming theoretical examinations in the proficiency test, which were used to set the pass mark. The external panel, recruited from a dental school at a university in another region in Sweden, provided ratings after the examinations. Three examinations during 2019-2020 were included in this study (267 items in total). There was a strong correlation (ρ ≥ 0.70, p < .001) between the ratings of the two independent panels, with no significant differences in item ratings across the full exams, dental disciplines, and professional qualifications analysed. This suggests that the three-level Angoff method reliably produces similar standards for assessing the competence of the minimally qualified dentist across different institutions. The expectations of the minimally qualified but still acceptable dentist were comparable between the two independent panels across the three theoretical examinations explored. The alignment between the panels indicates valid, reliable standards across institutions, despite the independent syllabi of the two study programmes. However, while there is an alignment, differences in ratings remain. Consequently, involving multiple institutions in future standard-setting processes could help ensure that the standards reflect a broader range of educational practices, supporting the credibility of licensure examinations.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
(Copyright: © 2024 Dalum et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje