We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Family medicine resident OSCEs: a systematic review.
Education for Primary Care 2016 November
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family Medicine trainees are often assessed in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). The purpose of this survey is to document the quality in terms of psychometrics and standard setting of OSCEs as used in Family Practice (FP)/General Practice (GP) training programs.
METHODS: Nine electronic data bases were searched from inception to December 2015 and included articles were searched in the PubMed single citation matcher. Two authors independently assessed all titles/abstracts/full texts and abstracted data. Articles were searched for OSCEs used for performance assessment of FP/GP trainees.
RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were identified which met our criteria published between 1987 and 2014. Content validity was reported in 18, construct validity in nine, and criterion (concurrent and/or predictive) validity in five. Five articles considered the consequences of testing. Internal reliability was reported by 12 studies, inter-rater reliability by seven, generalisability by four. Nine set pass-fail standards of which four were by criterion standards. In addition, we tabulated sources of validity and reliability as with particular reference to medical education.
CONCLUSIONS: We found few articles which vigorously provided evidence of validity and reliability. Standard-setting, when done, was normative in all high stakes exams. OSCEs used for formative purposes had lower psychometric standards.
METHODS: Nine electronic data bases were searched from inception to December 2015 and included articles were searched in the PubMed single citation matcher. Two authors independently assessed all titles/abstracts/full texts and abstracted data. Articles were searched for OSCEs used for performance assessment of FP/GP trainees.
RESULTS: Twenty-one studies were identified which met our criteria published between 1987 and 2014. Content validity was reported in 18, construct validity in nine, and criterion (concurrent and/or predictive) validity in five. Five articles considered the consequences of testing. Internal reliability was reported by 12 studies, inter-rater reliability by seven, generalisability by four. Nine set pass-fail standards of which four were by criterion standards. In addition, we tabulated sources of validity and reliability as with particular reference to medical education.
CONCLUSIONS: We found few articles which vigorously provided evidence of validity and reliability. Standard-setting, when done, was normative in all high stakes exams. OSCEs used for formative purposes had lower psychometric standards.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app