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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |