ObjectivePhysicians and medical students are generally poor-self assessors. Research suggests that this inaccuracy in self-assessment differs by gender among medical students whereby females underestimate their performance compared to their male counterparts. However, whether this gender difference in self-assessment is observable in low-stakes scenarios remains unclear. Our study’s objective was to determine whether self-assessment differed between male and female medical students when compared to peer-assessment in a low-stakes objective structured clinical examination.ResultsThirty-three (15 males, 18 females) third-year students participated in a 5-station mock objective structured clinical examination. Trained fourth-year student examiners scored their performance on a 6-point Likert-type global rating scale. Examinees also scored themselves using the same scale. To examine gender differences in medical students’ self-assessment abilities, mean self-assessment global rating scores were compared with peer-assessment global rating scores using an independent samples t test. Overall, female students’ self-assessment scores were significantly lower compared to peer-assessment (p < 0.001), whereas no significant difference was found between self- and peer-assessment scores for male examinees (p = 0.228). This study provides further evidence that underestimation in self-assessment among females is observable even in a low-stakes formative objective structured clinical examination facilitated by fellow medical students.

Background: The objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has gained widespread use as a form of performance assessment. However, opportunities for students to participate in practice OSCEs are limited by the financial, faculty and administrative investments required. Objectives: To determine the feasibility and acceptability of a student-run mock OSCE (MOSCE) as a learning experience for medical students of all 4 years. Design: We conducted a five-station MOSCE for third-year students. This involved fourth-year students as examiners and first-/second-year students as standardized patients (SPs). Each examiner scored examinees using a checklist and global rating scale while providing written and verbal feedback. MOSCE stations and checklists were designed by students and reviewed by a faculty supervisor. Following the MOSCE, participants completed surveys which elucidated their perceptions on the roles they took during the MOSCE. Results: Fifty examinees participated in the MOSCE. Of these, 42 (84%) consented to participate in the study and submitted completed questionnaires. Twenty-four examiners participated in the OSCE and consented to participate in the study, with 22 (92%) submitting completed questionnaires. Fifty-three of 60 SPs (88%) agreed to take part in this study, and 51 (85%) completed questionnaires. The internal consistency of the five-station OSCE was calculated as a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.443. Students commented positively on having the opportunity to network and engage in mentorship activities and reinforce clinical concepts. Conclusions: Examinees, examiners, and SPs all perceived the MOSCE to be a beneficial learning experience. We found the MOSCE to be a feasible and acceptable means of providing additional OSCE practice to students prior to higher-stakes evaluations.

ObjectivesCardiovascular disease (CVD) not only affects the patient, but has implications for the partner. Emerging evidence suggests that supportive couple relationships enhance CVD outcomes and reduce patient and partner distress. To date, however, little research has been done to address the couple relationship as a potentially important component of cardiac care. This article examines the impact of CVD on the couple relationship and assesses the perceived needs and desired intervention components of patients with CVD and their partners.DesignQualitative study using directed and conventional content analysis.SettingSingle-centre, tertiary cardiac care hospital that serves a population of 1.4 million in the Champlain region of Ontario, Canada.ParticipantsPatients with CVD and their partners (n=32, 16 couples) participated in focus groups. Patients were mainly male (75%), white (87.5%), aged 64.4 years (range 31–81 years), with varied cardiac diagnoses (50% coronary artery disease; 18.75% valve disease; 18.75% heart failure; 12.5% arrhythmia).ResultsFive categories were generated from the data reflecting changes within the couple relationship as a result of CVD: (1) emotional and communication disconnection; (2) overprotection of the patient; (3) role changes; (4) adjustment to lifestyle changes; and (5) positive relationship changes. Three categories were constructed regarding intervention needs and desired resources: (1) practical resources; (2) sharing with peers; and (3) relationship enhancement.ConclusionsOverall, the data suggest that there were profound changes in the couple relationship as a result of CVD, and that there is considerable need to better support the caregiving spouses and the couple as a unit. These results call for interventions designed to provide instrumental support, peer-sharing opportunities and relationship quality enhancement to help couples cope with CVD. Future studies should examine whether couples-based programming embedded into cardiac rehabilitation can be effective at improving relationship quality and reducing patient and partner stress in the aftermath of a cardiac event.

Student-led peer-assisted mock objective structured clinical examinations (MOSCEs) have been used in various settings to help students prepare for subsequent higher-stakes, faculty-run OSCEs. MOSCE participants generally valued feedback from peers and reported benefits to learning. Our study investigated whether participation in a peer-assisted MOSCE affected subsequent OSCE performance. To determine whether mean OSCE scores differed depending on whether medical students participated in the MOSCE, we conducted a between-subjects analysis of variance, with cohort (2016 vs. 2017) and MOSCE participation (MOSCE vs. no MOSCE) as independent variables and the mean OSCE score as the dependent variable. Participation in the MOSCE had no influence on mean OSCE scores (P=0.19). There was a significant correlation between mean MOSCE scores and mean OSCE scores (Pearson r=0.52, P<0.001). Although previous studies described self-reported benefits from participation in student-led MOSCEs, it was not associated with objective benefits in this study.

No abstract