Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
BACKGROUND: Traditional assessment has improved significantly over the past 50 years. A number of new testing methods are now in place, the computer is improving both the fidelity and efficiency of examinations, and the psychometric principles on which assessment rests are more sophisticated than ever. AIM: There is growing interest in quality improvement and there are increasing demands for public accountability. This has shifted the focus of testing from education to work. The purpose of this paper is to describe the assessment of work. DISCUSSION: In contrast to traditional assessment, there are no 'methods' for the evaluation of work because the content and difficulty of the examination are not controlled in any fashion. Instead it is a matter of identifying the basis for the judgements (outcomes, process, or volume), deciding how the data will be gathered (practice records, administrative databases, diaries/logs, or observation), and avoiding threats to validity and reliability (patient mix, patient complexity, attribution, and numbers of patients). FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Overall, the assessment of doctors' performance at work is in its infancy and much research and development is needed. Nonetheless, it is being used increasingly in programmes of continuous quality improvement and accountability. It is critical that refinements occur quickly to ensure that patients receive the highest quality of care and that doctors are treated fairly and provided with the information they need to guide their professional development.
John J. Norcini (Thu,) studied this question.