Cargando…

Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test

The script concordance test (SCT) is designed to assess clinical reasoning by adapting the likelihood of a case diagnosis, based on provided new information. In the standard instructions students are asked to exclude alternative diagnoses they have in mind when answering the questions, but it might...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van den Broek, W. E. Sjoukje, van Asperen, Marianne V., Custers, Eugène, Valk, Gerlof D., ten Cate, Olle Th. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3540344/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23316468
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-012-0017-0
_version_ 1782255217378590720
author van den Broek, W. E. Sjoukje
van Asperen, Marianne V.
Custers, Eugène
Valk, Gerlof D.
ten Cate, Olle Th. J.
author_facet van den Broek, W. E. Sjoukje
van Asperen, Marianne V.
Custers, Eugène
Valk, Gerlof D.
ten Cate, Olle Th. J.
author_sort van den Broek, W. E. Sjoukje
collection PubMed
description The script concordance test (SCT) is designed to assess clinical reasoning by adapting the likelihood of a case diagnosis, based on provided new information. In the standard instructions students are asked to exclude alternative diagnoses they have in mind when answering the questions, but it might be more authentic to include these. Fifty-nine final-year medical students completed an SCT. Twenty-nine were asked to take their differential diagnosis into account (adapted instructions). Thirty students were asked not to consider other diagnoses (standard instructions). All participants were asked to indicate for each question whether they were confused answering it with the given instructions (‘confusion indication’). Mean score of the test with the adapted instructions was 81.5 (SD 3.8) and of the test with the standard instructions 82.9 (SD 5.0) (p = 0.220). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.39 for the adapted instructions and 0.66 for the standard instructions. The mean number of confusion indications was 4.2 (SD 4.4) per student for the adapted instructions and 16.7 (SD 28.5) for the standard instructions (p = 0.139). Our attempt to improve SCTs reliability by modifying the instructions did not lead to a higher alpha; therefore we do not recommend this change in the instructional format.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3540344
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35403442013-01-09 Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test van den Broek, W. E. Sjoukje van Asperen, Marianne V. Custers, Eugène Valk, Gerlof D. ten Cate, Olle Th. J. Perspect Med Educ Original Article The script concordance test (SCT) is designed to assess clinical reasoning by adapting the likelihood of a case diagnosis, based on provided new information. In the standard instructions students are asked to exclude alternative diagnoses they have in mind when answering the questions, but it might be more authentic to include these. Fifty-nine final-year medical students completed an SCT. Twenty-nine were asked to take their differential diagnosis into account (adapted instructions). Thirty students were asked not to consider other diagnoses (standard instructions). All participants were asked to indicate for each question whether they were confused answering it with the given instructions (‘confusion indication’). Mean score of the test with the adapted instructions was 81.5 (SD 3.8) and of the test with the standard instructions 82.9 (SD 5.0) (p = 0.220). Cronbach’s alpha was 0.39 for the adapted instructions and 0.66 for the standard instructions. The mean number of confusion indications was 4.2 (SD 4.4) per student for the adapted instructions and 16.7 (SD 28.5) for the standard instructions (p = 0.139). Our attempt to improve SCTs reliability by modifying the instructions did not lead to a higher alpha; therefore we do not recommend this change in the instructional format. Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2012-08-21 2012-08 /pmc/articles/PMC3540344/ /pubmed/23316468 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-012-0017-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2012 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
van den Broek, W. E. Sjoukje
van Asperen, Marianne V.
Custers, Eugène
Valk, Gerlof D.
ten Cate, Olle Th. J.
Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
title Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
title_full Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
title_fullStr Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
title_full_unstemmed Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
title_short Effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
title_sort effects of two different instructional formats on scores and reliability of a script concordance test
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3540344/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23316468
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40037-012-0017-0
work_keys_str_mv AT vandenbroekwesjoukje effectsoftwodifferentinstructionalformatsonscoresandreliabilityofascriptconcordancetest
AT vanasperenmariannev effectsoftwodifferentinstructionalformatsonscoresandreliabilityofascriptconcordancetest
AT custerseugene effectsoftwodifferentinstructionalformatsonscoresandreliabilityofascriptconcordancetest
AT valkgerlofd effectsoftwodifferentinstructionalformatsonscoresandreliabilityofascriptconcordancetest
AT tencateollethj effectsoftwodifferentinstructionalformatsonscoresandreliabilityofascriptconcordancetest