B Hodges1, G Regehr, M Hanson, N McNaughton. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Centre for Research in Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. brian.hodges@utoronto.ca
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the validity of a psychiatry clerkship's objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). METHOD: In 1996, 33 clinical clerks and 17 psychiatry residents at the University of Toronto participated in an eight-station OSCE evaluated by psychiatrist-examiners using binary checklists and global ratings. Prior to the OSCE, communication course instructors were asked to rank the clerks on interviewing ability, and faculty supervisors were asked to identify the OSCE stations on which the clerks were likely to do well or poorly. RESULTS: Mean OSCE scores were significantly higher for the residents than for the clerks on global ratings but not on checklists. The communication instructors accurately predicted the clerks' rankings on the global scores but not their scores on the checklists. The faculty supervisors predicted with moderate accuracy the clerks' success on the OSCE stations as measured by the checklists but not by the global ratings. The residents rated the OSCE scenarios as highly realistic. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence of construct and concurrent validity together with high ratings of realism suggest that a psychiatry OSCE can be a valid assessment of clerks' clinical competence.
PURPOSE: To examine the validity of a psychiatry clerkship's objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). METHOD: In 1996, 33 clinical clerks and 17 psychiatry residents at the University of Toronto participated in an eight-station OSCE evaluated by psychiatrist-examiners using binary checklists and global ratings. Prior to the OSCE, communication course instructors were asked to rank the clerks on interviewing ability, and faculty supervisors were asked to identify the OSCE stations on which the clerks were likely to do well or poorly. RESULTS: Mean OSCE scores were significantly higher for the residents than for the clerks on global ratings but not on checklists. The communication instructors accurately predicted the clerks' rankings on the global scores but not their scores on the checklists. The faculty supervisors predicted with moderate accuracy the clerks' success on the OSCE stations as measured by the checklists but not by the global ratings. The residents rated the OSCE scenarios as highly realistic. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence of construct and concurrent validity together with high ratings of realism suggest that a psychiatry OSCE can be a valid assessment of clerks' clinical competence.
Authors: Barbara Farrell; Lisa Dolovich; Phil Emberley; Marie-Anik Gagné; Brad Jennings; Derek Jorgenson; Natalie Kennie; Pia Zeni Marks; Christine Papoushek; Nancy Waite; Donna M M Woloschuk Journal: Can Pharm J (Ott) Date: 2012-07
Authors: Tim Dwyer; Susan Glover Takahashi; Melissa Kennedy Hynes; Jodi Herold; David Wasserstein; Markku Nousiainen; Peter Ferguson; Veronica Wadey; M Lucas Murnaghan; Tim Leroux; John Semple; Brian Hodges; Darrell Ogilvie-Harris Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Folarin Odusola; Jennifer L Smith; Eva Turrigiano; Matisyahu Shulman; John T Grbic; James B Fine; Mei-Chen Hu; Edward V Nunes; Adam Bisaga; Frances R Levin Journal: Eur J Dent Educ Date: 2021-01-20 Impact factor: 2.355
Authors: Brett Kissela; Steven Harris; Dawn Kleindorfer; Christopher Lindsell; Robert Pascuzzi; Daniel Woo; Jerzy Szaflarski; Daniel Kanter; Alex Schneider; Michael Sostok; Joseph Broderick Journal: BMC Med Educ Date: 2006-04-25 Impact factor: 2.463
Authors: Mary E W Dankbaar; Karen M Stegers-Jager; Frank Baarveld; Jeroen J G van Merrienboer; Geoff R Norman; Frans L Rutten; Jan L C M van Saase; Stephanie C E Schuit Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-12-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: David Häske; Stefan K Beckers; Marzellus Hofmann; Rolf Lefering; Christine Preiser; Bernhard Gliwitzky; Paul Alfred Grützner; Ulrich Stöckle; Matthias Münzberg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-08-24 Impact factor: 3.240