Literature DB >> 11318994

Composite undergraduate clinical examinations: how should the components be combined to maximize reliability?

V Wass1, D McGibbon, C Van der Vleuten.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Clinical examinations increasingly consist of composite tests to assess all aspects of the curriculum recommended by the General Medical Council.
SETTING: A final undergraduate medical school examination for 214 students. AIM: To estimate the overall reliability of a composite examination, the correlations between the tests, and the effect of differences in test length, number of items and weighting of the results on the reliability.
METHOD: The examination consisted of four written and two clinical tests: multiple-choice questions (MCQ) test, extended matching questions (EMQ), short-answer questions (SAQ), essays, an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) and history-taking long cases. Multivariate generalizability theory was used to estimate the composite reliability of the examination and the effects of item weighting and test length.
RESULTS: The composite reliability of the examination was 0.77, if all tests contributed equally. Correlations between examination components varied, suggesting that different theoretically interpretable parameters of competence were being tested. Weighting tests according to items per test or total test time gave improved reliabilities of 0.93 and 0.81, respectively. Double weighting of the clinical component marginally affected the reliability (0.76).
CONCLUSION: This composite final examination achieved an overall reliability sufficient for high-stakes decisions on student clinical competence. However, examination structure must be carefully planned and results combined with caution. Weighting according to number of items or test length significantly affected reliability. The components testing different aspects of knowledge and clinical skills must be carefully balanced to ensure both content validity and parity between items and test length.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11318994     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2001.00929.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Educ        ISSN: 0308-0110            Impact factor:   6.251


  18 in total

1.  The long case versus objective structured clinical examinations.

Authors:  Geoff Norman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-03-30

2.  An Objective Structured Clinical Examination to Improve Formative Assessment for Senior Pediatrics Residents.

Authors:  Karen A Mangold; Justin M Jeffers; Rebekah A Burns; Jennifer L Trainor; Sharon M Unti; Walter Eppich; Mark D Adler
Journal:  J Grad Med Educ       Date:  2015-09

3.  Ensuring medical students are "fit for purpose".

Authors:  Val Wass
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-10-08

4.  Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) compared with traditional assessment methods.

Authors:  Stewart Brian Kirton; Laura Kravitz
Journal:  Am J Pharm Educ       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 2.047

5.  Providing Validation Evidence for a Clinical-Science Module: Improving Testing Reliability with Quizzes.

Authors:  Michael J Peeters; M Kenneth Cor; Erik D Maki
Journal:  Innov Pharm       Date:  2021-02-26

6.  Validation Evidence from using Generalizability Theory in a Basic-Science Course: Reliability of Course-Grades from Multiple Examinations.

Authors:  Michael J Peeters; M Kenneth Cor; Sai Hs Boddu; Jerry Nesamony
Journal:  Innov Pharm       Date:  2021-02-26

7.  Expert validation of fit-for-purpose guidelines for designing programmes of assessment.

Authors:  Joost Dijkstra; Robert Galbraith; Brian D Hodges; Pauline A McAvoy; Peter McCrorie; Lesley J Southgate; Cees P M Van der Vleuten; Val Wass; Lambert W T Schuwirth
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2012-04-17       Impact factor: 2.463

8.  Clinical assessment of transthoracic echocardiography skills: a generalizability study.

Authors:  Dorte Guldbrand Nielsen; Signe Lichtenstein Jensen; Lotte O'Neill
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 2.463

9.  A new framework for designing programmes of assessment.

Authors:  J Dijkstra; C P M Van der Vleuten; L W T Schuwirth
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2009-10-10       Impact factor: 3.853

10.  The need for national medical licensing examination in Saudi Arabia.

Authors:  Sohail Bajammal; Rania Zaini; Wesam Abuznadah; Mohammad Al-Rukban; Syed Moyn Aly; Abdulaziz Boker; Abdulmohsen Al-Zalabani; Mohammad Al-Omran; Amro Al-Habib; Mona Al-Sheikh; Mohammad Al-Sultan; Nadia Fida; Khalid Alzahrani; Bashir Hamad; Mohammad Al Shehri; Khalid Bin Abdulrahman; Saleh Al-Damegh; Mansour M Al-Nozha; Tyrone Donnon
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 2.463

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.