Correlation between qualitative and quantitative evaluation of BRUCE 1.0 at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Background: In the Master program of Medicine at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, the Brussels Clinical Evaluation (BRUCE) serves as a monthly student based evaluation instrument of the educational performance of clinical professors and departments. BRUCE started out as BRUCE 1.0 (paper version) and was used from February 2010 until June 2011.
Summary of work: Before introducing an electronic version, BRUCE 2.0, a qualitative and quantitative analysis of BRUCE 1.0 was done. The present study correlates both.
Summary of results: Two different situations appeared. On one hand there are questions with a high level of missing values and a lower mean and negative qualitative scores on relevance and clarity. On the other hand there are questions with a high level of missing values and a lower mean and no negative qualitative scores.
Discussion: Comparison of qualitative and quantitative study reveals why certain items have a high level of missing values and a low mean. The first situation reveals a construction flaw in the questions themselves, while the second situation reveals an effective qualitative problem within the internship.
Conclusion: Qualitative analysis helps to understand reasons for missing values and lower means.
Take home messages: When validating an instrument combining quantitative analysis with qualitative analysis is indispensable.