Purpose: Ensuring equivalence of examiners’ judgements within distributed objective structured clinical exams (OSCEs) is key to both fairness and validity but is hampered by lack of cross-over in the performances which different groups of examiners observe. This study develops a novel method called Video-based Examiner Score Comparison and Adjustment (VESCA) using it to compare examiners scoring from different OSCE sites for the first time.Materials/ Methods: Within a summative 16 station OSCE, volunteer students were videoed on each station and all examiners invited to score station-specific comparator videos in addition to usual student scoring. Linkage provided through the video-scores enabled use of Many Facet Rasch Modelling (MFRM) to compare 1/ examiner-cohort and 2/ site effects on students’ scores.Results: Examiner-cohorts varied by 6.9% in the overall score allocated to students of the same ability. Whilst only a tiny difference was apparent between sites, examiner-cohort variability was greater in one site than the other. Adjusting student scores altered their rank position by up to 3 deciles.Conclusions: Whilst comparatively limited examiner participation rates may limit interpretation of score adjustment in this instance, this study demonstrates the feasibility of using VESCA for quality assurance purposes in large scale distributed OSCEs.
BackgroundInformed consent is required for active participation of patients in medical education. At Keele Medical School, we require practices to advertise that they teach undergraduate students and to obtain appropriate patient consent at various stages of the patient journey.AimThe study aimed to explore patients’ experience of consent to involvement in undergraduate medical education in general practice.MethodDuring the final year at Keele University Medical School, students undertake a patient satisfaction survey. A questionnaire was attached to the reverse of this survey during the academic year 2016–2017. The questionnaire explored the stage of the patient journey consent was obtained, whether they were offered an alternative appointment and how comfortable they were with medical students being involved in their care.ResultsA total of 489 questionnaires were completed covering 62 GP practices. 97% of patients reported that consent was obtained at least once during their encounter and the majority reported that this occurred at booking. 98% of patients were comfortable or very comfortable with a medical student leading their consultation. However, 28% of those surveyed stated that they were either not given the option of not seeing the student or there was no other alternative appointment available.ConclusionThe results indicate that in the vast majority of cases patient consent is obtained at least once during their attendance. Patients expressed a high level of satisfaction with medical students’ involvement in their care. Further work is required to evaluate the role of the data as a marker of individual practice teaching quality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.