Literature DB >> 33761946

Feedback after OSCE: A comparison of face to face versus an enhanced written feedback.

Chin Fang Ngim1, Paul Douglas Fullerton2, Vanassa Ratnasingam2, Valliammai Jayanthi Thirunavuk Arasoo2, Nisha Angela Dominic2, Cindy Pei Sze Niap2, Sivakumar Thurairajasingam2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) is a useful means of generating meaningful feedback. OSCE feedback may be in various forms (written, face to face and audio or video recordings). Studies on OSCE feedback are uncommon, especially involving Asian medical students.
METHODS: We compared two methods of OSCE feedback delivered to fourth year medical students in Malaysia: (i) Face to face (FTF) immediate feedback (semester one) (ii) Individualised enhanced written (EW) feedback containing detailed scores in each domain, examiners' free text comments and the marking rubric (semester two). Both methods were evaluated by students and staff examiners, and students' responses were compared against their OSCE performance.
RESULTS: Of the 116 students who sat for both formative OSCEs, 82.8% (n=96) and 86.2% (n=100) responded to the first and second survey respectively. Most students were comfortable to receive feedback (91.3% in FTF, 96% in EW) with EW feedback associated with higher comfort levels (p=0.022). Distress affected a small number with no differences between either method (13.5% in FTF, 10% in EW, p=0.316). Most students perceived both types of feedback improved their performance (89.6% in FTF, 95% in EW); this perception was significantly stronger for EW feedback (p=0.008). Students who preferred EW feedback had lower OSCE scores compared to those preferring FTF feedback (mean scores ± SD: 43.8 ± 5.3 in EW, 47.2 ± 6.5 in FTF, p=0.049). Students ranked the "marking rubric" to be the most valuable aspect of the EW feedback. Tutors felt both methods of feedback were equally beneficial. Few examiners felt they needed training (21.4% in FTF, 15% in EW) but students perceived this need for tutors' training differently (53.1% in FTF, 46% in EW)
CONCLUSION: Whilst both methods of OSCE feedback were highly valued, students preferred to receive EW feedback and felt it was more beneficial. Learning cultures of Malaysian students may have influenced this view. Information provided in EW feedback should be tailored accordingly to provide meaningful feedback in OSCE exams.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Assessment; OSCE; culture; face to face; feedback; written

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33761946      PMCID: PMC7992790          DOI: 10.1186/s12909-021-02585-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Med Educ        ISSN: 1472-6920            Impact factor:   2.463


  12 in total

1.  Feedback in the OSCE: What Do Residents Remember?

Authors:  Susan Humphrey-Murto; Marika Mihok; Debra Pugh; Claire Touchie; Samantha Halman; Timothy J Wood
Journal:  Teach Learn Med       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 2.414

2.  [Educative effect of feedback after medical interview in objective structured clinical examination].

Authors:  Atsushi Ohyama; Hiroshi Nitta; Chie Shimizu; Satoko Ohara; Kouji Araki; Norimasa Kurosaki; Shiro Mataki
Journal:  Kokubyo Gakkai Zasshi       Date:  2005-03

3.  The power of feedback.

Authors:  John Norcini
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 6.251

4.  Programmatic assessment: From assessment of learning to assessment for learning.

Authors:  Lambert W T Schuwirth; Cees P M Van der Vleuten
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.650

5.  Evaluation of a multi-methods approach to the collection and dissemination of feedback on OSCE performance in dental education.

Authors:  M J Wardman; V C Yorke; J L Hallam
Journal:  Eur J Dent Educ       Date:  2017-05-19       Impact factor: 2.355

6.  How we give personalised audio feedback after summative OSCEs.

Authors:  Christopher J Harrison; Adrian J Molyneux; Sara Blackwell; Valerie J Wass
Journal:  Med Teach       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 3.650

7.  The effectiveness of immediate feedback during the objective structured clinical examination.

Authors:  R V Hodder; R N Rivington; L E Calcutt; I R Hart
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 6.251

8.  Providing feedback to students on clinical skills by using the Objective Structured Clinical Examination.

Authors:  N M Black; R M Harden
Journal:  Med Educ       Date:  1986-01       Impact factor: 6.251

9.  Feedback in clinical medical education.

Authors:  J Ende
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1983-08-12       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  The quality of feedback during formative OSCEs depends on the tutors' profile.

Authors:  Noelle Junod Perron; Martine Louis-Simonet; Bernard Cerutti; Eva Pfarrwaller; Johanna Sommer; Mathieu Nendaz
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 2.463

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.