• Clinics · Jan 2019

    Comparative Study

    "Shadow" OSCE examiner. A cross-sectional study comparing the "shadow" examiner with the original OSCE examiner format.

    • Marcelo Arlindo Vasconcelos Rodrigues, Rodrigo Diaz Olmos, Célia Maria Kira, Paulo Andrade Lotufo, Itamar Souza Santos, and Iolanda de Fátima Lopes Calvo Tibério.
    • Divisao de Clinica Medica, Hospital Universitario, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, SP, BR.
    • Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2019 Jan 1; 74: e1502.

    ObjectivesFeedback is a powerful learning tool, but a lack of appropriate feedback is a very common complaint from learners to teachers. To improve opportunities for feedback on objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs), a modified examiner role, termed the "shadow" examiner, was tested. This study aims to present and analyze comparisons between the "shadow" examiner and the original OSCE examiner format.MethodsIn 2011, experiments were carried out with modifications to the examiner's role to define the "shadow" examiner format. From February 2012 to May 2014, research was conducted with 415 6th-year medical students. Of these students, 316 were randomly assigned to assessments by both "shadow" and "fixed" examiners. Pearson correlation analysis with linear regression, Student's t-tests and Bland-Altman plots were the statistical methods used to compare the assessment modes. To strengthen the analysis, checklist items were classified by domain.ResultsHigh correlations between the "shadow" and "fixed" examiners' global scores were observed. The results of the analysis of specific domains demonstrated higher correlations for cognitive scores and lower correlations for affective scores. No statistically significant differences between the mean examiner global scores were found. The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the "shadow" examiners' affective scores were significantly higher than those of the "fixed" examiners, but the magnitude of this difference was small.ConclusionThe modified examiner role did not lead to any important bias in the students' scores compared with the original OSCE examiner format. This new strategy may provide important insights for formative assessments of clinical performance.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…