运用通用性理论研究客观结构化临床检查(oses)中结构化反馈对审查员判断的影响

Q1 Nursing
Wai Yee Amy Wong , Chris Roberts , Jill Thistlethwaite
{"title":"运用通用性理论研究客观结构化临床检查(oses)中结构化反馈对审查员判断的影响","authors":"Wai Yee Amy Wong ,&nbsp;Chris Roberts ,&nbsp;Jill Thistlethwaite","doi":"10.1016/j.hpe.2020.02.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>In the context of health professions education, the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has been implemented globally for assessment of clinical competence. Concerns have been raised about the significant influence of construct irrelevant variance arising from examiner variability on the robustness of decisions made in high-stakes OSCEs. An opportunity to explore an initiative to reduce examiner effects was provided by a secondary analysis of data from a large-scale summative OSCE of the final-year students (n &gt; 350) enrolled in a graduate-entry four-year Bachelor of Medicine/Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) program at one Australian research-intensive university. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of providing examiners with structured feedback on their stringency and leniency on assessing the final-year students’ clinical competence in the pre-feedback (P1) OSCE and post-feedback (P2) OSCE.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>This study adopted a quasi-experimental design to analyse the scores from 141 examiners before feedback was provided for the P1 OSCE, and 111 examiners after feedback was provided for the P2 OSCE. This novel approach used generalisability theory to quantify and compare the examiner stringency and leniency variance (V<sub><em>j</em></sub>) contributing to the examiners’ scores before and after feedback was provided. Statistical analyses conducted were controlled for differences in the examiners and OSCE stations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Comparing the scores of the 51 examiners who assessed students in both P1 and P2 OSCEs, the V<sub><em>j</em></sub> reduced by 35.65% and its contribution to the overall variation in their scores decreased by 7.43%. The results were more noticeable in the 26 examiners who assessed students in both OSCEs and in at least one station common across both OSCEs. The V<sub><em>j</em></sub> reduced by 40.56% and its contribution to the overall variation in their scores was also decreased by 7.72%.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The findings might be suggested that providing examiners with structured feedback could reduce the examiner stringency and leniency variation contributing to their scores in the subsequent OSCE, whilst noting limitations with the quasi-experimental design. More definitive research is required prior to making recommendations for practice.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":93562,"journal":{"name":"Health professions education","volume":"6 2","pages":"Pages 271-281"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hpe.2020.02.005","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Structured Feedback on Examiner Judgements in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) Using Generalisability Theory\",\"authors\":\"Wai Yee Amy Wong ,&nbsp;Chris Roberts ,&nbsp;Jill Thistlethwaite\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hpe.2020.02.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>In the context of health professions education, the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has been implemented globally for assessment of clinical competence. Concerns have been raised about the significant influence of construct irrelevant variance arising from examiner variability on the robustness of decisions made in high-stakes OSCEs. An opportunity to explore an initiative to reduce examiner effects was provided by a secondary analysis of data from a large-scale summative OSCE of the final-year students (n &gt; 350) enrolled in a graduate-entry four-year Bachelor of Medicine/Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) program at one Australian research-intensive university. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of providing examiners with structured feedback on their stringency and leniency on assessing the final-year students’ clinical competence in the pre-feedback (P1) OSCE and post-feedback (P2) OSCE.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>This study adopted a quasi-experimental design to analyse the scores from 141 examiners before feedback was provided for the P1 OSCE, and 111 examiners after feedback was provided for the P2 OSCE. This novel approach used generalisability theory to quantify and compare the examiner stringency and leniency variance (V<sub><em>j</em></sub>) contributing to the examiners’ scores before and after feedback was provided. Statistical analyses conducted were controlled for differences in the examiners and OSCE stations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Comparing the scores of the 51 examiners who assessed students in both P1 and P2 OSCEs, the V<sub><em>j</em></sub> reduced by 35.65% and its contribution to the overall variation in their scores decreased by 7.43%. The results were more noticeable in the 26 examiners who assessed students in both OSCEs and in at least one station common across both OSCEs. The V<sub><em>j</em></sub> reduced by 40.56% and its contribution to the overall variation in their scores was also decreased by 7.72%.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The findings might be suggested that providing examiners with structured feedback could reduce the examiner stringency and leniency variation contributing to their scores in the subsequent OSCE, whilst noting limitations with the quasi-experimental design. More definitive research is required prior to making recommendations for practice.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":93562,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health professions education\",\"volume\":\"6 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 271-281\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hpe.2020.02.005\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health professions education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452301120300237\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health professions education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452301120300237","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

目的在卫生专业教育的背景下,客观结构化临床考试(OSCE)已在全球范围内实施,以评估临床能力。在高风险的欧安组织中,审查员可变性引起的结构无关方差对决策的稳健性的显著影响引起了关注。通过对最后一年学生的大规模总结性欧安组织数据的二次分析,提供了一个探索减少考官影响的倡议的机会(n >350)在澳大利亚一所研究型大学注册了一个研究生入学的四年制医学/外科学士(MBBS)课程。本研究的目的是调查在预反馈(P1) OSCE和后反馈(P2) OSCE中,为审查员提供结构化反馈对其严格和宽松评估最后一年学生临床能力的影响。方法采用准实验设计,对141名主考官在反馈前的成绩和111名主考官反馈后的成绩进行分析。该方法利用泛化理论,量化和比较了反馈前后考官的严格和宽容方差(Vj)对考官分数的影响。对审查员和欧安组织监测站之间的差异进行了统计分析。结果51名主考官对P1和P2两个osce的成绩进行比较,Vj下降了35.65%,对总分变化的贡献下降了7.43%。这一结果在26名主考官身上更为明显,他们分别评估了两个欧安组织和至少一个欧安组织共同站点的学生。Vj降低了40.56%,对总分变化的贡献也降低了7.72%。结论为审查员提供结构化的反馈可以减少审查员在随后的欧安组织考试中的严格和宽容差异,同时也注意到准实验设计的局限性。在提出实践建议之前,需要进行更明确的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Structured Feedback on Examiner Judgements in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) Using Generalisability Theory

Purpose

In the context of health professions education, the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has been implemented globally for assessment of clinical competence. Concerns have been raised about the significant influence of construct irrelevant variance arising from examiner variability on the robustness of decisions made in high-stakes OSCEs. An opportunity to explore an initiative to reduce examiner effects was provided by a secondary analysis of data from a large-scale summative OSCE of the final-year students (n > 350) enrolled in a graduate-entry four-year Bachelor of Medicine/Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) program at one Australian research-intensive university. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of providing examiners with structured feedback on their stringency and leniency on assessing the final-year students’ clinical competence in the pre-feedback (P1) OSCE and post-feedback (P2) OSCE.

Method

This study adopted a quasi-experimental design to analyse the scores from 141 examiners before feedback was provided for the P1 OSCE, and 111 examiners after feedback was provided for the P2 OSCE. This novel approach used generalisability theory to quantify and compare the examiner stringency and leniency variance (Vj) contributing to the examiners’ scores before and after feedback was provided. Statistical analyses conducted were controlled for differences in the examiners and OSCE stations.

Results

Comparing the scores of the 51 examiners who assessed students in both P1 and P2 OSCEs, the Vj reduced by 35.65% and its contribution to the overall variation in their scores decreased by 7.43%. The results were more noticeable in the 26 examiners who assessed students in both OSCEs and in at least one station common across both OSCEs. The Vj reduced by 40.56% and its contribution to the overall variation in their scores was also decreased by 7.72%.

Conclusion

The findings might be suggested that providing examiners with structured feedback could reduce the examiner stringency and leniency variation contributing to their scores in the subsequent OSCE, whilst noting limitations with the quasi-experimental design. More definitive research is required prior to making recommendations for practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
38 weeks
×
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