Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31092236›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2019

How the introduction of OSCEs has affected the time students spend studying: results of a nationwide study.

Stefan Müller, Ines Koch, Utz Settmacher, Uta Dahmen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Stefan MüllerDepartment of General, Visceral and Vascular Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Ines KochDepartment of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Utz SettmacherDepartment of General, Visceral and Vascular Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Am Klinikum 1, 07747, Jena, Germany.
Uta DahmenDepartment of General, Visceral and Vascular Surgery, Experimental Transplantation Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Drackendorfer Str. 1, 07747, Jena, Germany. uta.dahmen@med.uni-jena.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3483-3388

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical schools globally now use objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) for assessing a student's clinical performance. In Germany, almost all of the 36 medical schools have incorporated at least one summative OSCE into their clinical curriculum. This nationwide study aimed to examine whether the introduction of OSCEs shifted studying time. The authors explored what resources were important for studying in preparation for OSCEs, how much time students spent studying, and how they performed; each compared to traditionally used multiple choice question (MCQ) tests.

methodsThe authors constructed a questionnaire comprising two identical sections, one for each assessment method. Either section contained a list of 12 study resources requesting preferences on a 5-point scale, and two open-ended questions about average studying time and average grades achieved. During springtime of 2015, medical schools in Germany were asked to administer the web-based questionnaire to their students in years 3-6. Statistical analysis compared the responses on the open-ended questions between the OSCE and MCQs using a paired t-test.

resultsThe sample included 1131 students from 32 German medical schools. Physical examination courses were most important in preparation for OSCEs, followed by class notes/logs and the skills lab. Other activities in clinical settings (e.g. medical clerkships) and collaborative strategies ranked next. Conversely, resources for gathering knowledge (e.g. lectures or textbooks) were of minor importance when studying for OSCEs. Reported studying time was lower for OSCEs compared to MCQ tests. The reported average grade, however, was better on OSCEs.

conclusionsThe study findings suggest that the introduction of OSCEs shifted studying time. When preparing for OSCEs students focus on the acquisition of clinical skills and need less studying time to achieve the expected level of competence/performance, as compared to the MCQ tests.

Indexed as

Educational MeasurementSchools, MedicalStudents, MedicalAdultAnalysis of VarianceClinical CompetenceCurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleHumansMalePilot ProjectsSurveys and QuestionnairesTask Performance and AnalysisAssessmentMedical studentsOSCEsStudy behaviourSurvey

Identifiers

PMID31092236
PMCPMC6521539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.