Cargando…

A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School

Background: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of using the checklist and global rating scores to evaluate the clinical competency of medical students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Additionally, the study assesses the appropriateness of using the borderline regress...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elabd, Kossay, Abdul-Kadir, Husam, Alkhenizan, Abdullah, Alkhalifa, Mohammed K
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10320738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37415995
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39968
_version_ 1785068499165511680
author Elabd, Kossay
Abdul-Kadir, Husam
Alkhenizan, Abdullah
Alkhalifa, Mohammed K
author_facet Elabd, Kossay
Abdul-Kadir, Husam
Alkhenizan, Abdullah
Alkhalifa, Mohammed K
author_sort Elabd, Kossay
collection PubMed
description Background: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of using the checklist and global rating scores to evaluate the clinical competency of medical students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Additionally, the study assesses the appropriateness of using the borderline regression method to set standards for small-scale OSCE exams and determines if the estimated passing marks differ significantly from the university's prefixed passing score of 70%. The study also examines whether the university should utilize the borderline regression method to determine passing scores for each OSCE exam instead of a set passing score. Methods: The study analyzed medical students' grades in 11 OSCE exams in the 2022-2023 academic year at Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Students received family medicine clerkship rotations, and after each rotation, they took an OSCE exam consisting of three stations that family medicine consultants graded. The exam included a checklist of 30 tasks and a five-level global rank scale. The study collected all the checklist marks and global rank grades and analyzed them using IBM® Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS® Statistics) software. The statistical tests used were descriptive statistics, the T-test, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact test, and Pearson correlation. Results: The study showed that students were more likely to pass when using the global rating system than the checklist scoring system. Additionally, students had a significantly lower passing rate when using the higher cut-off passing score estimated using the borderline regression method compared to the pre-set passing score of 70% established by the university (with a p-value of 0.00). Conclusion: Each scoring system has advantages and disadvantages, but they complement each other. Combining scoring systems can produce a more comprehensive and precise evaluation of a candidate's performance. The study also emphasizes the importance of carefully selecting and validating cut-off points in OSCE exams to ensure fairness and consistency in assessment.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10320738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103207382023-07-06 A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School Elabd, Kossay Abdul-Kadir, Husam Alkhenizan, Abdullah Alkhalifa, Mohammed K Cureus Family/General Practice Background: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of using the checklist and global rating scores to evaluate the clinical competency of medical students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Additionally, the study assesses the appropriateness of using the borderline regression method to set standards for small-scale OSCE exams and determines if the estimated passing marks differ significantly from the university's prefixed passing score of 70%. The study also examines whether the university should utilize the borderline regression method to determine passing scores for each OSCE exam instead of a set passing score. Methods: The study analyzed medical students' grades in 11 OSCE exams in the 2022-2023 academic year at Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Students received family medicine clerkship rotations, and after each rotation, they took an OSCE exam consisting of three stations that family medicine consultants graded. The exam included a checklist of 30 tasks and a five-level global rank scale. The study collected all the checklist marks and global rank grades and analyzed them using IBM® Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS® Statistics) software. The statistical tests used were descriptive statistics, the T-test, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact test, and Pearson correlation. Results: The study showed that students were more likely to pass when using the global rating system than the checklist scoring system. Additionally, students had a significantly lower passing rate when using the higher cut-off passing score estimated using the borderline regression method compared to the pre-set passing score of 70% established by the university (with a p-value of 0.00). Conclusion: Each scoring system has advantages and disadvantages, but they complement each other. Combining scoring systems can produce a more comprehensive and precise evaluation of a candidate's performance. The study also emphasizes the importance of carefully selecting and validating cut-off points in OSCE exams to ensure fairness and consistency in assessment. Cureus 2023-06-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10320738/ /pubmed/37415995 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39968 Text en Copyright © 2023, Elabd et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Family/General Practice
Elabd, Kossay
Abdul-Kadir, Husam
Alkhenizan, Abdullah
Alkhalifa, Mohammed K
A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School
title A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School
title_full A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School
title_fullStr A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School
title_full_unstemmed A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School
title_short A Comparison of the Checklist Scoring Systems, Global Rating Systems, and Borderline Regression Method for an Objective Structured Clinical Examination for a Small Cohort in a Saudi Medical School
title_sort comparison of the checklist scoring systems, global rating systems, and borderline regression method for an objective structured clinical examination for a small cohort in a saudi medical school
topic Family/General Practice
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10320738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37415995
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39968
work_keys_str_mv AT elabdkossay acomparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT abdulkadirhusam acomparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT alkhenizanabdullah acomparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT alkhalifamohammedk acomparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT elabdkossay comparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT abdulkadirhusam comparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT alkhenizanabdullah comparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool
AT alkhalifamohammedk comparisonofthechecklistscoringsystemsglobalratingsystemsandborderlineregressionmethodforanobjectivestructuredclinicalexaminationforasmallcohortinasaudimedicalschool