BackgroundThe Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is increasingly used at medical schools to assess practical competencies. To compare the outcomes of students at different medical schools, we introduced standardized OSCE stations with identical checklists.MethodsWe investigated examiner bias at standardized OSCE stations for knee- and shoulder-joint examinations, which were implemented into the surgical OSCE at five different medical schools. The checklists for the assessment consisted of part A for knowledge and performance of the skill and part B for communication and interaction with the patient. At each medical faculty, one reference examiner also scored independently to the local examiner. The scores from both examiners were compared and analysed for inter-rater reliability and correlation with the level of clinical experience. Possible gender bias was also evaluated.ResultsIn part A of the checklist, local examiners graded students higher compared to the reference examiner; in part B of the checklist, there was no trend to the findings. The inter-rater reliability was weak, and the scoring correlated only weakly with the examiner’s level of experience. Female examiners rated generally higher, but male examiners scored significantly higher if the examinee was female.ConclusionsThese findings of examiner effects, even in standardized situations, may influence outcome even when students perform equally well. Examiners need to be made aware of these biases prior to examining.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-017-0908-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Using our methodology, video-assisted feedback offered a significant educational benefit over oral feedback alone during a simulated patient encounter in a surgical context.

Background: Ensuring that all medical students achieve adequate clinical skills remains a challenge, yet the correct performance of clinical skills is critical for all fields of medicine. This study analyzes the influence of receiving feedback by teaching associates in the context of achieving and maintaining a level of expertise in complex head and skull examination. Methods: All third year students at a German university who completed the obligatory surgical skills lab training and surgical clerkship participated in this study. The students were randomized into two groups. Control group: lessons by an instructor and peer-based practical skills training. Intervention group: training by teaching associates who are examined as simulation patients and provided direct feedback on student performance. Their competency in short-and long-term competence (directly after intervention and at 4 months after the training) of head and skull examination was measured. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics version 19 (IBM, Armonk, USA). Parametric and non-parametric test methods were applied. As a measurement of correlation, Pearson correlations and correlations via Kendall's-Tau-b were calculated and Cohen's d effect size was calculated. Results: A total of 181 students were included (90 intervention, 91 control). Out of those 181 students 81 agreed to be videotaped (32 in the control group and 49 in the TA group) and examined at time point 1. At both time points, the intervention group performed the examination significantly better (time point 1, p = <.001; time point 2 (rater 1 p = .009, rater 2 p = .015), than the control group. The effect size (Cohens d) was up to 1.422. Conclusions: The use of teaching associates for teaching complex practical skills is effective for short-and long-term retention. We anticipate the method could be easily translated to nearly every patient-based clinical skill, particularly with regards to a competence-based education of future doctors.