Ranking: A year three follow-up in a different institution

David J. Curtis, David F. Cruess, Daniel D. Riordan, Robert M. Allman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations


Ranking residents as a means of semiobjective evaluation of their overall performance was described in 1985. The predictive nature of pooled faculty ranking of residents was stressed. Ranking of resident total scores on The American College In-training Examination and American Board of Radiology written examination was noted to be statistically related to the pooled faculty ranking. Similarly, the faculty ranking was predictive of itself in subsequent rankings. A cohesiveness of faculty consensus was present such that small numbers (five minimum) were predictive of larger groups of participating faculty. All reported observations persist in the new institution. Exceptions to expected residency level of training stratification (eg, third-year residents ranking in the midst of first-year residents, second-year residents ranking above many third-year residents) continue to be the most useful observation in counseling residents. Additional information reported includes sensitivity of the ranking to improvement or nonimprovement of probated residents.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)541-544
Number of pages4
JournalInvestigative Radiology
Issue number7
StatePublished - Jul 1988
Externally publishedYes


  • ACR in-training test
  • Evaluation
  • Performance
  • Resident
  • Resident
  • Standardized
  • Testing


Dive into the research topics of 'Ranking: A year three follow-up in a different institution'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this