The use of the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) in a practice-based health discipline: Academic and student experience in paramedicine

A. Bell, J. Kelly, P. Lewis
{"title":"The use of the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) in a practice-based health discipline: Academic and student experience in paramedicine","authors":"A. Bell, J. Kelly, P. Lewis","doi":"10.33966/hepj.3.2.14225","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Purpose:Over the past two decades, the discipline of Paramedicine has seen expediential growth as it moved from a work-based training model to that of an autonomous profession grounded in academia.  With limited evidence-based literature examining assessment in paramedicine, this paper aims to describe student and academic views on the preference for OSCE as an assessment modality, the sufficiency of pre-OSCE instruction, and whether or not OSCE performance is a perceived indicator of clinical performance.Design/Methods:A voluntary, anonymous survey was conducted to examine the perception of the reliability and validity of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) as an assessment tool by students sitting the examination and the academics that facilitate the assessment. Findings:The results of this study revealed that the more confident the students are in the reliability and validity of the assessment, the more likely they are to perceive the assessment as an effective measure of their clinical performance.  The perception of reliability and validity differs when acted upon by additional variables, with the level of anxiety associated with the assessment and the adequacy of feedback of performance cited as major influencers. Research Implications:The findings from this study indicate the need for further paramedicine discipline specific research into assessment methodologies to determine best practice models for high quality assessment.Practical Implications:The development of evidence based best practice guidelines for the assessment of student paramedics should be of the upmost importance to a young, developing profession such as paramedicine.Originality/Value: There is very little research in the discipline specific area of assessment for paramedicine and discipline specific education research is essential for professional growth.Limitations:The principal researcher was a faculty member of one of the institutions surveyed.  However, all data was non identifiable at time of data collection.  Key WordsParamedic; paramedicine; objective structured clinical examinations; OSCE; education; assessment.","PeriodicalId":119792,"journal":{"name":"Health Education in Practice: Journal of Research for Professional Learning","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Education in Practice: Journal of Research for Professional Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33966/hepj.3.2.14225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Purpose:Over the past two decades, the discipline of Paramedicine has seen expediential growth as it moved from a work-based training model to that of an autonomous profession grounded in academia.  With limited evidence-based literature examining assessment in paramedicine, this paper aims to describe student and academic views on the preference for OSCE as an assessment modality, the sufficiency of pre-OSCE instruction, and whether or not OSCE performance is a perceived indicator of clinical performance.Design/Methods:A voluntary, anonymous survey was conducted to examine the perception of the reliability and validity of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) as an assessment tool by students sitting the examination and the academics that facilitate the assessment. Findings:The results of this study revealed that the more confident the students are in the reliability and validity of the assessment, the more likely they are to perceive the assessment as an effective measure of their clinical performance.  The perception of reliability and validity differs when acted upon by additional variables, with the level of anxiety associated with the assessment and the adequacy of feedback of performance cited as major influencers. Research Implications:The findings from this study indicate the need for further paramedicine discipline specific research into assessment methodologies to determine best practice models for high quality assessment.Practical Implications:The development of evidence based best practice guidelines for the assessment of student paramedics should be of the upmost importance to a young, developing profession such as paramedicine.Originality/Value: There is very little research in the discipline specific area of assessment for paramedicine and discipline specific education research is essential for professional growth.Limitations:The principal researcher was a faculty member of one of the institutions surveyed.  However, all data was non identifiable at time of data collection.  Key WordsParamedic; paramedicine; objective structured clinical examinations; OSCE; education; assessment.
在以实践为基础的卫生学科中使用客观结构化临床检查:辅助医学方面的学术和学生经验
摘要:目的:在过去的二十年中,辅助医学学科从以工作为基础的培训模式转变为以学术为基础的自主职业,取得了迅速的发展。由于有限的循证文献研究了辅助医学评估,本文旨在描述学生和学术界对欧安组织作为评估方式的偏好、欧安组织前指导的充分性以及欧安组织绩效是否为临床绩效的感知指标的看法。设计/方法:进行了一项自愿的匿名调查,以检查参加考试的学生和促进评估的学者对客观结构化临床检查(OSCE)作为评估工具的可靠性和有效性的看法。研究发现:本研究的结果显示,学生对评估的信度和效度越有信心,他们就越有可能将评估视为其临床表现的有效衡量标准。当受到其他变量的影响时,对可靠性和有效性的感知会有所不同,与评估相关的焦虑程度和绩效反馈的充分性被认为是主要影响因素。研究意义:本研究的结果表明,需要进一步对辅助医学学科的评估方法进行研究,以确定高质量评估的最佳实践模型。实际意义:基于证据的最佳实践指南的发展,学生护理人员的评估应该是最重要的一个年轻的,发展中的职业,如护理医学。原创性/价值:对辅助医学的特定学科评估领域的研究很少,而特定学科的教育研究对专业成长至关重要。限制:首席研究员是被调查机构之一的教员。然而,在数据收集时,所有数据都是不可识别的。关键WordsParamedic;paramedicine;目的结构化临床检查;欧安组织;教育;评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信