- Title
- Expert clinical examiner's decision processes in objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs); is intuition a valid and reliable decision strategy?
- Creator
- Cooper, Simon J.; Bradbury, Martyn; Blakely, Gillian
- Date
- 2009
- Type
- Text; Journal article
- Identifier
- http://researchonline.federation.edu.au/vital/access/HandleResolver/1959.17/97317
- Identifier
- vital:10206
- Identifier
- ISSN:1753-0431
- Abstract
- Objective: To quantify the relationship between examiners’ global rating and checklist scores and to identify the factors influencing examiners’ decisions in Masters Level Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Methods: A quantitative and qualitative focus group design; including a retrospective review of OSCE results (n = 561) and four focus groups with experienced clinical examiners. Results: There was a strong positive correlation (rho 0.75) between global ratings and checklist scores. However, borderline checklist scores tended to be higher than the global rating category and more experienced examiners tended to allocate lower global ratings (p = ≤0.001). Data obtained from the focus groups helped elucidate the reasons for these findings and suggested that examiners may utilize Recognition Primed Decision Making (RPD) as a method of assessing a candidates overall performance during OSCE. Conclusion: Global rating scales are an appropriate assessment scale and improve the validity and reliability of OSCEs in this setting. Methods for incorporating these findings into future OSCE marking criteria are discussed.
- Relation
- International Journal of Clinical Skills Vol. 3, no. 3 (2009), p. 140-146
- Rights
- © International Journal of Clinical Skills
- Rights
- This metadata is freely available under a CCO license
- Subject
- 1110 Nursing
- Reviewed
- Hits: 494
- Visitors: 499
- Downloads: 0