IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0186902.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of fitness for duty of underperforming physicians: The importance of using appropriate norms

Author

Listed:
  • Betsy White Williams
  • Philip Flanders
  • Elizabeth S Grace
  • Elizabeth Korinek
  • Dillon Welindt
  • Michael V Williams

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether population-specific normative data should be employed when screening neurocognitive functioning as part of physician fitness for duty evaluations. If so, to provide such norms based on the evidence currently available. Methods: A comparison of published data from four sources was analyzed. Data from the two physician samples were then entered into a meta-analysis to obtain full information estimates and generate provisional norms for physicians. Results: Two-way analysis of variance (Study x Index) revealed a significant main effect and an interaction. Results indicate differences in mean levels of performance and standard deviation for physicians. Conclusions: Reliance on general population normative data results in under-identification of potential neuropsychological difficulties. Population specific normative data are needed to effectively evaluate practicing physicians.

Suggested Citation

  • Betsy White Williams & Philip Flanders & Elizabeth S Grace & Elizabeth Korinek & Dillon Welindt & Michael V Williams, 2017. "Assessment of fitness for duty of underperforming physicians: The importance of using appropriate norms," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-13, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0186902
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186902
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186902
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0186902&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0186902?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0186902. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.