Cargando…
Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) Same Evidence, Different Judgement
BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), originally developed in the 1970's, has been hailed as the "gold standard" of clinical assessments for medical students and is used within medical schools throughout the world. The Clinical assessment of Skills and Comp...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2011
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3118176/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21575216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-11-85 |
_version_ | 1782206430287233024 |
---|---|
author | Marwaha, Steven |
author_facet | Marwaha, Steven |
author_sort | Marwaha, Steven |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), originally developed in the 1970's, has been hailed as the "gold standard" of clinical assessments for medical students and is used within medical schools throughout the world. The Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) is an OSCE used as a clinical examination gateway, granting access to becoming a senior Psychiatrist in the UK. DISCUSSION: Van der Vleuten's utility model is used to examine the CASC from the viewpoint of a senior psychiatrist. Reliability may be equivalent to more traditional examinations. Whilst the CASC is likely to have content validity, other forms of validity are untested and authenticity is poor. Educational impact has the potential to change facets of psychiatric professionalism and influence future patient care. There are doubts about acceptability from candidates and more senior psychiatrists. SUMMARY: Whilst OSCEs may be the best choice for medical student examinations, their use in post graduate psychiatric examination in the UK is subject to challenge on the grounds of validity, authenticity and educational impact. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3118176 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2011 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-31181762011-06-19 Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) Same Evidence, Different Judgement Marwaha, Steven BMC Psychiatry Debate BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), originally developed in the 1970's, has been hailed as the "gold standard" of clinical assessments for medical students and is used within medical schools throughout the world. The Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) is an OSCE used as a clinical examination gateway, granting access to becoming a senior Psychiatrist in the UK. DISCUSSION: Van der Vleuten's utility model is used to examine the CASC from the viewpoint of a senior psychiatrist. Reliability may be equivalent to more traditional examinations. Whilst the CASC is likely to have content validity, other forms of validity are untested and authenticity is poor. Educational impact has the potential to change facets of psychiatric professionalism and influence future patient care. There are doubts about acceptability from candidates and more senior psychiatrists. SUMMARY: Whilst OSCEs may be the best choice for medical student examinations, their use in post graduate psychiatric examination in the UK is subject to challenge on the grounds of validity, authenticity and educational impact. BioMed Central 2011-05-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3118176/ /pubmed/21575216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-11-85 Text en Copyright ©2011 Marwaha; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Debate Marwaha, Steven Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) Same Evidence, Different Judgement |
title | Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC)
Same Evidence, Different Judgement |
title_full | Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC)
Same Evidence, Different Judgement |
title_fullStr | Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC)
Same Evidence, Different Judgement |
title_full_unstemmed | Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC)
Same Evidence, Different Judgement |
title_short | Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs), psychiatry and the Clinical assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC)
Same Evidence, Different Judgement |
title_sort | objective structured clinical examinations (osces), psychiatry and the clinical assessment of skills and competencies (casc)
same evidence, different judgement |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3118176/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21575216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-11-85 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT marwahasteven objectivestructuredclinicalexaminationsoscespsychiatryandtheclinicalassessmentofskillsandcompetenciescascsameevidencedifferentjudgement |