Medical Students' Performances Using Different Assessment Methods during the Final Examination in Internal Medicine at the University of Benghazi, Libya

Najat Buzaid, Sami A. Lawgaly, Saleh M. Alawgali, Amina Albash, Mousa Alfakhri
{"title":"Medical Students' Performances Using Different Assessment Methods during the Final Examination in Internal Medicine at the University of Benghazi, Libya","authors":"Najat Buzaid, Sami A. Lawgaly, Saleh M. Alawgali, Amina Albash, Mousa Alfakhri","doi":"10.1055/s-0043-1776309","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background Distinctive evaluation tools assess diverse fields of learning that considerably impact the learning process.\n Objective To compare and correlate the performances of undergraduate final year medical students in written, clinical, and viva examinations in the subject of internal medicine.\n Methods This is a retrospective study. After authority approval, data was collected from final year examination results during 2019 to 2020. All the students of the medical school at University of Benghazi were included in this study. Their gender and their written, clinical, viva, and total scores were included. Data were coded and transferred from Excel to SPSS version 24 and expressed as frequencies and percentages. Chi-squared analysis was performed to test for differences in the proportions of categorical variables between two or more groups. Odd ratio (OR) is used to calculate the odds of passing the subject based on scores in different types of exams. Person's correlation (R) is used to evaluate the consistency of students' performances in different examinations. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered the cut-off value of significant.\n Results The total number of students was 679, out of which 499 (73.5%) were females and 180 (26.5%) were males. The total number of students who passed the course was 422 (62%) with no significant differences between males and females. A statistically significant (p < 0.001) greater percentage of students achieved a passing score in clinical assessment (502 [73.9%]), followed by viva assessment (458.0 [67.5%]). The students performed the worse in written examination with only 291/679 (43%) students passing the examination, with no gender-based differences. There was a highly significant association between the total score of students who passed the subject and their scores in the written examination with an OR of 2.3 (p < 0.001). Viva examination and total score OR was 0.79 with no significant differences for males or females. On the contrary, there was a statistically significant negative association between clinical exams and total scores of students who passed the subject (OR = 0.58). There was a highly significant correlation (p < 0.001) between written examination and viva examination (R = 0.638), between written examination and clinical examination (R = 0.629), and between clinical and viva examinations (R = 0.763).\n Conclusion Students demonstrated higher performance on clinical and viva exams compared with written exams. Additionally, there were no notable disparities in results between male and female students across any of the three exam types. The written exam served as the most reliable indicator of a student's success in the subject. Furthermore, the data revealed a positive correlation between scores on the different exam formats, indicating that students exhibited consistent performance across all modes of evaluation.","PeriodicalId":18106,"journal":{"name":"Libyan International Medical University Journal","volume":"74 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Libyan International Medical University Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1776309","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

Background Distinctive evaluation tools assess diverse fields of learning that considerably impact the learning process. Objective To compare and correlate the performances of undergraduate final year medical students in written, clinical, and viva examinations in the subject of internal medicine. Methods This is a retrospective study. After authority approval, data was collected from final year examination results during 2019 to 2020. All the students of the medical school at University of Benghazi were included in this study. Their gender and their written, clinical, viva, and total scores were included. Data were coded and transferred from Excel to SPSS version 24 and expressed as frequencies and percentages. Chi-squared analysis was performed to test for differences in the proportions of categorical variables between two or more groups. Odd ratio (OR) is used to calculate the odds of passing the subject based on scores in different types of exams. Person's correlation (R) is used to evaluate the consistency of students' performances in different examinations. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered the cut-off value of significant. Results The total number of students was 679, out of which 499 (73.5%) were females and 180 (26.5%) were males. The total number of students who passed the course was 422 (62%) with no significant differences between males and females. A statistically significant (p < 0.001) greater percentage of students achieved a passing score in clinical assessment (502 [73.9%]), followed by viva assessment (458.0 [67.5%]). The students performed the worse in written examination with only 291/679 (43%) students passing the examination, with no gender-based differences. There was a highly significant association between the total score of students who passed the subject and their scores in the written examination with an OR of 2.3 (p < 0.001). Viva examination and total score OR was 0.79 with no significant differences for males or females. On the contrary, there was a statistically significant negative association between clinical exams and total scores of students who passed the subject (OR = 0.58). There was a highly significant correlation (p < 0.001) between written examination and viva examination (R = 0.638), between written examination and clinical examination (R = 0.629), and between clinical and viva examinations (R = 0.763). Conclusion Students demonstrated higher performance on clinical and viva exams compared with written exams. Additionally, there were no notable disparities in results between male and female students across any of the three exam types. The written exam served as the most reliable indicator of a student's success in the subject. Furthermore, the data revealed a positive correlation between scores on the different exam formats, indicating that students exhibited consistent performance across all modes of evaluation.
利比亚班加西大学医学生在内科期末考试中使用不同评估方法的表现
背景 不同的评价工具对不同的学习领域进行评估,对学习过程产生重大影响。目的 比较和关联本科应届医学生在内科科目笔试、临床和口头考试中的表现。方法 这是一项回顾性研究。经当局批准后,从 2019 至 2020 年期间的期末考试成绩中收集数据。研究对象包括班加西大学医学院的所有学生。他们的性别、笔试成绩、临床成绩、口试成绩和总成绩均包括在内。数据经编码后从 Excel 转移到 SPSS 24 版,并以频率和百分比表示。采用卡方分析检验两个或多个组别之间分类变量比例的差异。奇数比(OR)用于根据不同类型考试的分数计算通过该科目的几率。人相关(R)用于评估学生在不同考试中表现的一致性。P 值小于 0.05 即为显著。结果 学生总数为 679 人,其中女生 499 人(占 73.5%),男生 180 人(占 26.5%)。通过课程的学生总数为 422 人(62%),男女生之间没有明显差异。在临床评估(502[73.9%])和口头评估(458.0[67.5%])中,取得及格分数的学生比例明显更高(P < 0.001)。学生在笔试中的表现较差,只有 291/679 (43%) 名学生通过考试,没有性别差异。通过该科目考试的学生的总成绩与笔试成绩之间存在非常明显的联系,OR 值为 2.3 (p < 0.001)。口头考试与总分的 OR 值为 0.79,男女生之间无明显差异。相反,临床考试与该科目及格学生的总分之间存在统计学意义上的显著负相关(OR = 0.58)。笔试与口头考试(R = 0.638)、笔试与临床考试(R = 0.629)以及临床考试与口头考试(R = 0.763)之间存在高度相关性(p < 0.001)。结论 与笔试相比,学生在临床考试和毕业论文考试中的成绩更高。此外,在三种考试类型中,男女学生的成绩没有明显差异。笔试是衡量学生在该科目上取得成功的最可靠指标。此外,数据显示,不同考试形式的分数之间存在正相关,表明学生在所有评价模式中的表现都是一致的。
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