Objective Structured Clinical Examination Research Articles

Pre-COVID and COVID experience of objective structured clinical examination as a learning tool for post-graduate residents in Obstetrics & Gynecology-a quality improvement study.

Due to its comprehensive, reliable, and valid format, the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) is the gold standard for assessing the clinical competency of medical students. In the present study, we evaluated the importance of the OSCE as a learning tool for postgraduate (PG) residents assessing their junior undergraduate students. We further aimed to analyze quality improvement during the pre-coronavirus disease (COVID) and COVID periods. This quality-improvement interventional study was conducted at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. The PG residents were trained to conduct the OSCE. A formal feedback form was distributed to 22 participants, and their responses were analyzed using a five-point Likert scale. Fishbone analysis was performed, and the 'plan-do-study-act' (PDSA) cycle was implemented to improve the OSCE. Most of the residents (95%) believed that this examination system was extremely fair and covered a wide range of clinical skills and knowledge. Further, 4.5% believed it was more labor- and resource intensive and time-consuming. Eighteen (81.8%) residents stated that they had learned all three domains: communication skills, time management skills, and a stepwise approach to clinical scenarios. The PDSA cycle was run eight times, resulting in a dramatic improvement (from 30% to 70%) in the knowledge and clinical skills of PGs and the standard of OSCE. The OSCE can be used as a learning tool for young assessors who are receptive to novel tools. The involvement of PGs in the OSCE improved their communication skills and helped overcome human resource limitations while manning various OSCE stations.

Objective structured clinical examination as a competency assessment tool of students’ readiness for advanced pharmacy practice experiences in South Korea: a pilot study

BackgroundThe assessment of pharmacy students’ readiness to begin the education of an advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) in clinical pharmacy settings continues to gain increasing attention. This study aimed to develop an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) in the core domains acquired through an introductory pharmacy practice experience (IPPE), for evaluating its appropriateness as a tool of assessing clinical pharmacist competency for APPEs in Korean pharmacy students throughout a pilot study.MethodsOSCE’s core competency domains and case scenarios were developed through a literature review, ideation by researchers, and external experts’ consensus by a Delphi method. A prospective single-arm pilot test was conducted to implement the OSCE for Korean pharmacy students who completed a 60-h course of in-class simulation IPPE. Their competencies were assessed by four assessors in each OSCE station with a pass-fail grading system accompanied by a scoring rubric.ResultsOSCE competency areas including patient counseling, provision of drug information, over-the-counter (OTC) counseling, and pharmaceutical care services were developed with four interactive and one non-interactive cases. Twenty pharmacy students participated in the OSCE pilot test, and their competencies were evaluated by 20 assessors. The performance rate was the lowest in the area of patient counseling for a respiratory inhaler (32.1%) and the highest (79.7%) in OTC counseling for constipation. The students had an average performance rate of 60.4% in their communication skills. Most participants agreed on the appropriateness, necessity, and effectiveness of the OSCE in evaluating pharmacy students’ clinical performance and communication skills.ConclusionsThe OSCE model can be used to assess pharmacy students’ readiness for off-campus clinical pharmacy practice experience. Our pilot study suggests the necessity of conducting an OSCE domain-based adjustment of difficulty levels, and strengthening simulation-based IPPE education.

The relationship of online pre-recorded neurology mini-lectures to medical student assessment: a pilot study

IntroductioneLearning has become an essential part of medical education. However, there is a lack of published research on student engagement with online pre-recorded mini-lectures and its relation to assessment. The aim of this pilot study is to explore the relationship between newly introduced neurology pre-recorded mini-lectures and undergraduate medical students engagement and assessment. This may encourage the wider use of mini-lectures in undergraduate medical curricula.MethodsThe engagement of medical students with 48 online pre-recorded neurology mini-lectures was assessed through a Learning Management System. To measure engagement, data was stratified according to the number of watched/downloaded mini-lectures. A point system was used (out of 5): − 1 point = watching/downloading 0–10 mini-lectures, 2 points = watching/downloading 11–20 mini-lectures, 3 points = watching/downloading 21–30 mini-lectures, 4 points = watching/downloading 31–40 mini-lectures and, 5 points = watching/downloading 41–48 mini-lectures. The students’ engagement was correlated with their neurology assessments [Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), and knowledge-based assessment 10 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) and one 10-mark Short Answer Question, (SAQ)], internal medicine grade and annual grade point average (GPA) using the Pearson correlation coefficient.ResultsThe mean engagement of 34, Year 5, medical students is 3.9/5. There is a significant positive correlation between engagement and internal medicine grade (r = 0.35, p = 0.044). There is a moderate correlation between engagement and neurology OSCE (r = 0.23), annual Year 5 GPA (r = 0.23), neurology knowledge-based score (r = 0.22) and composite neurology knowledge/OSCE (r = 0.27). The knowledge-based assessment included SAQ and MCQs: there was a moderate correlation with SAQ (r = 0.30), but a weak negative correlation with the MCQs (r =-0.11). Sub-groups analysis comparing the top- and low- or non- engaging students made these weaker correlations stronger.ConclusionThis pilot study indicates a high rate of engagement with an online pre-recorded mini-lectures resource and evidence of moderate correlation between engagement and assessment. Online pre-recorded mini-lectures should be used more in delivering the curriculum contents of the clinical clerkships. Further studies are needed to evaluate the relation and the impact of the mini-lectures on assessment.

Development and Validation of a Simulation Model for Collection of Canine Vaginal Samples.

Vaginal cytology is a widely used cytological technique mostly taught by observation, either through direct tutoring or videos. To the best of our knowledge, vaginal cytology simulators have never been assessed in veterinary medicine. Twenty-five undergraduate students with no prior experience in canine vaginal sampling were randomly assigned to two groups that either practiced the procedure in a simulator or a live animal. An inverted classroom design was followed. After observing a video tutorial, students practiced with the simulator/live animal for two classes. Three weeks later, they performed a vaginal cytology on a live animal being recorded. The videos were evaluated through an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) by an observer blinded to the student's groups. The learning outcome was compared through OSCE pass rates and questionnaires. The simulation model was made by 3D printing and soft silicone for the vulvar labia, having pink and blue colored vaseline in the correct and incorrect locations for sampling. The model was economic and accurately replicated the female reproductive tract. It provided immediate feedback to students, by obtaining pink or blue swabs from the correct and incorrect locations, respectively. Students reported that three to five or more attempts were needed to properly learn the procedure, thus justifying the need for a simulator. No differences in the OSCE pass rates were observed between the groups. The simulation model was effective for learning the vaginal cytology procedure, replacing the use of live animals. This low-cost model should be incorporated in the tool-kit of reproduction classes.

Prior participation as a standardized patient improves OSCE scores of third-year medical students: A pilot comparative study at Université Paris Cité Medical School

Objective Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCE) are one of the main modalities of skills’ assessment of medical students. We aimed to evaluate the educational value of the participation of third-year medical students in OSCE as standardized patients. Methods We conducted a pilot OSCE session where third-year students participated in sixth-year students’ OSCE as standardized patients (cases). Their scores in their own subsequent OSCE exams were compared with third-year students who had not participated (controls). Students’ perceptions (stress, preparedness, ease) regarding their OSCE were compared with self-administered questionnaires. Results A total of 42 students were included (9 cases and 33 controls). Median [IQR] overall score (out of 20 points) obtained by the cases was 17 [16.3–18] versus 14.5 [12.7–16.3] for controls (p < 0.001). Students’ perception of their evaluation (difficulty, stress, communication) was not significantly different between cases and controls. Most cases agreed that their participation was beneficial in reducing their stress (67%), increasing their preparedness (78%) and improving their communication skills (100%). All cases agreed that this participation should be offered more widely. Conclusion Students’ participation in OSCE as standardized patients led to better performance on their own OSCE and were considered beneficial. This approach could be more broadly generalized to improve student performance.

MP66-19 INTER-OBSERVER RELIABILITY OF EXAMINER SCORING ON HIGH STAKES UROLOGY OBJECTIVE STRUCTURED CLINICAL EXAMINATION

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP66-19 INTER-OBSERVER RELIABILITY OF EXAMINER SCORING ON HIGH STAKES UROLOGY OBJECTIVE STRUCTURED CLINICAL EXAMINATION Charles Paco, Iain Macintyre, and Naji Touma Charles PacoCharles Paco More articles by this author , Iain MacintyreIain Macintyre More articles by this author , and Naji ToumaNaji Touma More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003329.19AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is an attractive tool of competency assessment in a high stakes summative exam. An advantage of the OSCE is the ability to assess more realistic context, content and procedures. Each year, the Queen’s Urology Exam Skills Training (QUEST) is attended by graduating Canadian urology residents to simulate their upcoming board exams. The exam consists of a written component and an OSCE. The aim of this study was to determine the inter-observer consistency of scoring between two examiners of an OSCE for a given candidate. METHODS: 39 participants in 2020 and 37 participants in 2021 completed four stations OSCEs virtually over the Zoom platform. Each candidate was examined and scored independently by 2 different faculty urologists in a blinded fashion at each station. The OSCE scoring consisted of a checklist rating scale for each question. An intra class correlation (ICC) analysis was conducted to determine the inter-rater reliability of the two examiners for each of the four OSCE stations in both the 2020 and 2021 OSCEs. RESULTS: For the 2020 data, the prostate cancer station scores were most strongly correlated (ICC 0.746, 95% CI (0.556-0.862) p<0.001). This was followed by the general urology station (ICC 0.688, 95% CI (0.464-0.829) p<0.001, the urinary incontinence station (ICC 0.638 95% CI (0.403- 0.794) p<0.001) and finally the nephrolithiasis station 0.472 95% CI (0.183-0.686) p<0.001). For the 2021 data, the renal cancer station had the highest ICC at 0.866 (95% CI (0.754-0.930) p<0.001). This was followed by the nephrolithiasis station (ICC 0.817 95% CI (0.673-0.901) p<0.001), the pediatric station (ICC 0.809, 95% CI (0.660-0.897) p<0.001) and finally the andrology station (ICC 0.804, 95% CI (649-0.895) p<0.001). Values less than 0.5 are indicative of poor reliability, values between 0.5 and 0.75 indicate moderate reliability, values between 0.75 and 0.9 indicate good reliability, and values greater than 0.90 indicate excellent reliability. CONCLUSIONS: Given a specific clinical scenario in an OSCE exam, inter-rater reliability of scoring can be compromised on occasion. The factors determining this divergence in examiner agreement will need further research to help elucidate, especially if OSCEs are continued as the gold standard in high stakes examinations. Source of Funding: None © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e941 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Charles Paco More articles by this author Iain Macintyre More articles by this author Naji Touma More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Evaluation of the Implementation of Objective Structural Clinical Examination (OSCE) in the Faculty of Medicine: a Literature Review

Medical educators always want the best method for conducting formative and summative student evaluations. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is an assessment that evaluates aspects of clinical competence in a comprehensive, consistent and structured manner with due observance of objectivity. Clinical skills assessment in OSCE includes history taking, physical examination, communication skills, professionalism, technical skills, problem-solving, decision-making, and time management. However, OSCE is currently one of the exams that students are afraid of, causing sleep disturbances and anxiety. In addition, OSCE involves many personnel in its implementation, so good coordination is needed to create a conducive exam situation. Therefore, evaluation is very important to measure student competency or capability, determine goals that have been and have not been achieved, and get feedback to improve OSCE implementation in the future.

Recommendations After an Objective Structured Clinical Examination Program Evaluation

The use of objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) is a well-established method of clinical assessment in the medical profession, and these are currently being integrated into advanced practice nursing curricula. A program assessment was conducted at a current family nurse practitioner track within a southwestern U.S. university using the OSCE evaluative strategy. The logic model from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention framework was incorporated. Both focus group and the de-identified faculty-scored student rubrics during the fall, spring, and summer semesters of one cohort of students (N = 73) were examined. Strengths and challenges were found in the areas of student preparation, scoring/grading with variations of inter-rater reliability, and debriefing. Establishing a specific OSCE center with a dedicated director could support adequate attainment of formative and summative competencies for nurse practitioners and provide faculty education and standardized student preparation, while adhering to the multiple guidelines and standards related to nurse practitioner competency evaluation with simulation. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 2023;54(4):169-175.].

Student Performance Outcomes and Perceptions in Two Content Areas in Conventional Versus Integrated Pharmacy Curricula

Objective. To compare student performance measures and perceptions of learning in 2 content areas, conventional and integrated pharmacy curricula, at a single institution.Methods. Prospective cohort study of pharmacy students enrolled in either conventional (cohort C) or integrated (cohort I) curricula. Summative examination performance in the neuropsychiatric and infectious diseases courses, student self-rating of confidence and comfort in integrating and applying knowledge, and performance on a delayed knowledge assessment were compared between cohorts.Results. Cohort I students performed significantly lower on summative assessments compared to cohort C (78.4±9.1 vs 84.5±8.3, respectively). Prior to the integrated course, cohort I students rated themselves as significantly less confident and comfortable in knowledge integration, application, and communication compared to cohort C students; these differences were attenuated in a follow-up survey, although some remained significant. There was no difference between cohorts in performance on objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) or on a delayed knowledge assessment of neuropsychiatric and infectious diseases content.Conclusion. Pharmacy students in an integrated curriculum initially performed modestly worse in summative assessments and self-assessed their baseline knowledge as lower than did students in a conventional curriculum. However, differences in self-rated knowledge decreased at follow-up, and performance of the two cohorts on OSCEs and a delayed examination was similar. As pharmacy curricula shift towards integrated models, institutions should also consider evaluating experiential performance outcomes and student motivation to fully assess the impact of these transitions.

Assessment of Saudi MEDs framework competence in performing clinical and practical skills by final-year medical students

Clinical examinations and practical clinical skills are essential to guide diagnosis and treatment. Competency-based medical education (CBME) is high on today’s medical education agenda, and competence has become the unit of medical education planning in many countries. With the rise of medical education in Saudi Arabia, The Saudi MEDs initiative began as a means of achieving national consensus and developing necessary learning outcomes for medical schools. The aim of this study is to evaluate the final-year medical students’ core clinical competencies and identify the gaps between clinical skills in the Saudi MEDs framework and students’ actual achievement. Online data collection from all fifth-year medical students, to assess their clinical and procedural skills by using Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) scores and using a self-administered questionnaire that has been developed based on the Saudi MEDs framework. Eight clinical competencies were chosen out of the 17 after consulting the experts in this field. OSCE scores were checked for correlation with their self-assessment scores. The total OSCE scores of 323 students were evaluated which showed 93% of students have passed all eight competencies. Also, 304 students responded to the self-administered questionnaire in the current Saudi MEDs competencies 323 (response rate=94.11). The students were confident in the majority of the eight clinical competencies of the Saudi MEDs framework. Saudi MEDs framework has ensured that Saudi medical or health care education adapted to changing demands, critical competencies are not overlooked, teaching and learning, and evaluation are appropriate at medical schools by implementing the competency framework.

Development of a Novel Web-Based Tool to Enhance Clinical Skills in Medical Education.

A significant component of Canadian medical education is the development of clinical skills. The medical educational curriculum assesses these skills through an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). This OSCE assesses skills imperative to good clinical practice, such as patient communication, clinical decision-making, and medical knowledge. Despite the widespread implementation of this examination across all academic settings, few preparatory resources exist that cater specifically to Canadian medical students. MonkeyJacket is a novel, open-access, web-based application, built with the goal of providing medical students with an accessible and representative tool for clinical skill development for the OSCE and clinical settings. This viewpoint paper presents the development of the MonkeyJacket application and its potential to assist medical students in preparation for clinical examinations and practical settings. Limited resources exist that are web-based; accessible in terms of cost; specific to the Medical Council of Canada (MCC); and, most importantly, scalable in nature. The goal of this research study was to thoroughly describe the potential utility of the application, particularly its capacity to provide practice and scalable formative feedback to medical students. MonkeyJacket was developed to provide Canadian medical students with the opportunity to practice their clinical examination skills and receive peer feedback by using a centralized platform. The OSCE cases included in the application were developed by using the MCC guidelines to ensure their applicability to a Canadian setting. There are currently 75 cases covering 5 specialties, including cardiology, respirology, gastroenterology, neurology, and psychiatry. The MonkeyJacket application is a web-based platform that allows medical students to practice clinical decision-making skills in real time with their peers through a synchronous platform. Through this application, students can practice patient interviewing, clinical reasoning, developing differential diagnoses, and formulating a management plan, and they can receive both qualitative feedback and quantitative feedback. Each clinical case is associated with an assessment checklist that is accessible to students after practice sessions are complete; the checklist promotes personal improvement through peer feedback. This tool provides students with relevant case stems, follow-up questions that probe for differential diagnoses and management plans, assessment checklists, and the ability to review the trend in their performance. The MonkeyJacket application provides medical students with a valuable tool that promotes clinical skill development for OSCEs and clinical settings. MonkeyJacket introduces a way for medical learners to receive feedback regarding patient interviewing and clinical reasoning skills that is both formative and scalable in nature, in addition to promoting interinstitutional learning. The widespread use of this application can increase the practice of and feedback on clinical skills among medical learners. This will not only benefit the learner; more importantly, it can provide downstream benefits for the most valuable stakeholder in medicine-the patient.

Students’ and examiners’ perception of feedback practices following OSCE in Uniport

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) offers several opportunities for effective feedback to be given to students to improve their performance. This study aimed to evaluate the feedback practices following OSCE in the University of Port Harcourt (Uniport). This was descriptive research involving the administration of semi-structured questionnaires to examiners in the Faculty of Clinical Sciences and final year medical students in Uniport. Information sought centred on their perception of feedback practices following OSCE. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics and Chi-square. The result showed that 114 examiners participated in the study. There were 72 (63.16%) male and 42 (36.84%) female examiners with male to female ratio of 1.7:1. Ninety students participated in the study. There were 49 (54.44%) males and 41 (45.56%) females. Their mean age was 25.42±2.36. There were significant differences between the examiners and students perception of feedback practices following OSCE in Uniport in terms of whether (P=0.009) and when (P=0.0014) it is provided. Majority of the examiners (58.49%) and almost all the students (91.49%) reported that feedback resulted in improved performance. The stud y showed that about half of the students claimed that feedback is given following OSCE in Uniport. Feedback practice following OSCE in Uniport is satisfactory in some aspects and deficient in some other aspects. Incorporate quality feedback practices into the OSCE process in all medical schools will improve skills development and learning.

Objective structured clinical examination: Do first-year nursing students perceive it to be stressful?

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is widely accepted as an effective means of assessing clinical competence and nursing skills. There is, however, little existing knowledge on how first-year nursing students perceived stress during their first OSCE. To determine the perception of stress; to identify the perceived factors causing stress; and to determine the perceived incidence of stress. A descriptive, survey was conducted on a sample of 82 first-year nursing students using the Perceived Stress Scale (PPS). The results showed that more than half (n= 54) of students perceived stress at moderate levels. Students not having sufficient time to complete the OSCE was perceived as the main factor causing stress (mean = 22.04; standard deviation [s.d.] = 6.21). The correlation between perception of stress and perceived factors causing stress showed a significant weak positive linear correlation among the variables (r= 0.45;p 0.05). The study findings are important as the data determining the first-year nursing students' perception of stress were collected immediately after their first OSCE, which may indicate that perception of stress was related to the actual event rather than the preparation for the OSCE. A follow-up qualitative research study should be conducted, preferably in the same setting, so that the students' experiences of stress during the first OSCE can be explored in depth.

Comparability of Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) and Written Tests for Assessing Medical School Students' Competencies: A Scoping Review.

Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) and written tests are commonly used to assess health professional students, but it remains unclear whether the additional human resources and expenses required for OSCEs, both in-person and online, are worthwhile for assessing competencies. This scoping review summarized literature identified by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE comparing 1) OSCEs and written tests and 2) in-person and online OSCEs, for assessing health professional trainees' competencies. For Q1, 21 studies satisfied inclusion criteria. The most examined health profession was medical trainees (19, 90.5%), the comparison was most frequently OSCEs versus multiple-choice questions (MCQs) (18, 85.7%), and 18 (87.5%) examined the same competency domain. Most (77.5%) total score correlation coefficients between testing methods were weak (r < 0.40). For Q2, 13 articles were included. In-person and online OSCEs were most used for medical trainees (9, 69.2%), checklists were the most prevalent evaluation scheme (7, 63.6%), and 14/17 overall score comparisons were not statistically significantly different. Generally low correlations exist between MCQ and OSCE scores, providing insufficient evidence as to whether OSCEs provide sufficient value to be worth their additional cost. Online OSCEs may be a viable alternative to in-person OSCEs for certain competencies where technical challenges can be met.

Sexual and reproductive health teaching in undergraduate medical education: A narrative review.

Contraception use, undesired pregnancy, and abortion care are common medical experiences that most physicians will encounter for their patients. Future physicians should therefore have some formal education on these topics. In this narrative review, we focused on how medical education approaches these sometimes polarizing yet fundamental topics. We assessed the published literature on sexual and reproductive health education in undergraduate medical education from 2000 to 2021, screening 868 articles and including 52 articles. We included articles that discussed contraception, emergency contraception, pregnancy options counseling, abortion, and ethics related to sexual and reproductive health. Included studies came from 14 countries and described both preclinical and clinical education. Studies assessed medical student knowledge, the effectiveness of educational interventions and medical school faculty perspectives on sexual and reproductive health curricula. Medical educators have employed a variety of approaches to teach sexual and reproductive health including simulation, objective structured clinical examinations, team-based learning, narrative medicine, online modules, and flipped classrooms. Students generally received sexual and reproductive health education favorably, demonstrating increased knowledge and comfort with these topics after an education session. Studies also identified curricular gaps and deficiencies in student knowledge, which may indicate a need for improved and consistent medical school education on contraception and abortion.

PERCEPTION OF MEDICAL STUDENTS AND EXAMINERS TOWARDS OBJECTIVE STRUCTURED CLINICAL EXAMINATION: A FEEDBACK FOR IMPROVEMENT

Background &#x0D; Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is globally used in the assessment of the clinical competency of medical students. Nevertheless, OSCE has to be carefully designed and organised to be fair and reliable.&#x0D; Objectives &#x0D; The study aimed to observe the perception of medical students and their examiners towards OSCE.&#x0D; Materials and Methods&#x0D; The survey is a cross-sectional study in which a self-administrative questionnaire was designed and filled by 286 third-year students and 64 examiners of the College of Medicine /University of Sulaimani after the end of phase-1 assessment OSCE of 2020-2021. Ethical approval has been obtained from the university. The study data were collected and analysed by SPSS (23.0).&#x0D; Results&#x0D; The response rate was high among the students and examiners; 95.6% (286/299) and 80% (64/80), respectively. The OSCE reliability test was acceptable (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.78-0.81). The proportions of agreed students to the OSCE fairness, tested skills, and minimising the chance of failing were 42.7%, 51.4%, and 33%, respectively; however, 65.8% found the OSCE very stressful. Although 45% of the students felt dissatisfied with the OSCE instructions, 42-58% and 33-39% agreed with the OSCE organisation and performance, respectively. Among the examiners, the majority perceived that the OSCE was fair, well-organised, and timed. Compared to the conventional method, 79.7% of the examiners thought that OSCE was better in various domain assessments, whereas 60.9% found it exhausting. &#x0D; Conclusion&#x0D; Overall, students’ perception of the OSCE was similarly spread to agree, neutral, and disagree, which was lower than the examiner’s great satisfaction. These results highlighted the necessity of further improvement in future OSCEs.

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination to Assess Moroccan Residents in Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics

The Objective Structured Clinical Examination to Assess Moroccan Residents in Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics

Clinical experience can compensate for inferior academic achievements in an undergraduate objective structured clinical examination

BackgroundPractical and non-cognitive skills are essential to medical professions; yet, success in medical studies is primarily assessed with cognitive criteria. We show that practical exams can benefit students who have only average high school final grades, but working experience in medical professions.MethodsWith a cross-sectional study, we compare the performance of undergraduate medical students with working experience in adjacent health-care professions (and below-average school leaving-grades) with students who entered medical school directly based on their excellent school records in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). For a sample of more than 1,200 students, we use information on OSCE scores in medical and practical skills, doctor-patient communication/interaction, performance in MC-exams, and core sociodemographic variables.ResultsWaiting list students outperformed their classmates in the demonstration of practical skills. Students admitted via their excellent school grades scored best overall. This difference vanishes once we control for school-leaving grade and age, the two main factors separating the analysed groups. Students from the waiting list have a significantly smaller overall chance to reach excellent grades in the first two years of study.ConclusionsStudents who gathered experiences in health-care professions before enrolling at medical school can benefit from an expanded role of practical elements in medical studies. Student selection instruments should take these different starting positions and qualities of applicants into account, for example with a quota for the professionally experienced.

Semantic competence and prototypical verbalizations are associated with higher OSCE and global medical degree scores: a multi-theory pilot study on year 6 medical student verbalizations.

The organization of medical knowledge is reflected in language and can be studied from the viewpoints of semantics and prototype theory. The purpose of this study is to analyze student verbalizations during an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) and correlate themwith test scores and final medical degree (MD) scores. Wehypothesize that students whose verbalizations are semantically richer and closer to the disease prototype will show better academic performance. We conducted a single-center study during a year 6 (Y6) high-stakes OSCE where one probing intervention wasincluded at the end of the exam to capture students' reasoning about one of the clinical cases. Verbalizations were transcribed and coded. An assessment panel categorized verbalizations regarding their semantic value (Weak, Good, Strong). Semantic categories and prototypical elements were compared with OSCE, case-based exam and global MD scores. Students with Semantic 'Strong' verbalizations displayed higher OSCE, case-based exam and MD scores, while the use of prototypical elements was associated with higher OSCE and MD scores. Semantic competence and verbalizations matching the disease prototype may identify students withbetter organization of medical knowledge. This work provides empirical groundwork for future research on language analysis to support assessment decisions.

Development, Validation, and Reliability of a P1 Objective Structured Clinical Examination Assessing the National EPAs

ObjectiveTo document the performance of first-year pharmacy students on a revised objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) based on national entrustable professional activities, identify risk factors for poor performance, and assess its validity and reliability. MethodsA working group developed the OSCE to verify students’ progress toward readiness for advanced pharmacy practice experiences at the L1 level of entrustment (ready for thoughtful observation) on the national entrustable professional activities, with stations cross-mapped to the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education educational outcomes. Baseline characteristics and academic performance were used to investigate risk factors for poor performance and validity, respectively, by comparing students who were successful on the first attempt with those who were not. Reliability was evaluated using re-grading by a blinded, independent grader, and analyzed using Cohen’s kappa. ResultsA total of 65 students completed the OSCE. Of these, 33 (50.8%) successfully completed all stations on first attempt, and 32 (49.2%) had to re-attempt at least 1 station. Successful students had higher Health Sciences Reasoning Test scores (mean difference 5, 95% CI 2–9). First professional year grade point average was higher for students who passed all stations on first attempt (mean difference 0.4 on a 4-point scale, 95% CI 0.1–0.7). When evaluated in a multiple logistic regression, no differences were statistically significant between groups. Most kappa values were above 0.4 (range 0.404–0.708), suggesting moderate to substantial reliability. ConclusionThough predictors of poor performance were not identified when accounting for covariates, the OSCE was found to have good validity and reliability.