Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32374267›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical education2020

An Objective Structured Clinical Examination for Medical Student Radiology Clerkships: Reproducibility Study.

Pedro Vinícius Staziaki, Rutuparna Sarangi, Ujas N Parikh, Jeffrey G Brooks, Christina Alexandra LeBedis, Kitt Shaffer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical education, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
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

6 authors.

Pedro Vinícius StaziakiDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3219-3815
Rutuparna SarangiDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5042-9388
Ujas N ParikhDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8241-4922
Jeffrey G BrooksDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7223-1084
Christina Alexandra LeBedisDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8849-736X
Kitt ShafferDepartment of Radiology, Boston Medical Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6488-6988

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObjective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are a useful method to evaluate medical students' performance in the clerkship years. OSCEs are designed to assess skills and knowledge in a standardized clinical setting and through use of a preset standard grading sheet, so that clinical knowledge can be evaluated at a high level and in a reproducible way.

objectiveThis study aimed to present our OSCE assessment tool designed specifically for radiology clerkship medical students, which we called the objective structured radiology examination (OSRE), with the intent to advance the assessment of clerkship medical students by providing an objective, structured, reproducible, and low-cost method to evaluate medical students' radiology knowledge and the reproducibility of this assessment tool.

methodsWe designed 9 different OSRE cases for radiology clerkship classes with participating third- and fourth-year medical students. Each examination comprises 1 to 3 images, a clinical scenario, and structured questions, along with a standardized scoring sheet that allows for an objective and low-cost assessment. Each medical student completed 3 of 9 random examination cases during their rotation. To evaluate for reproducibility of our scoring sheet assessment tool, we used 5 examiners to grade the same students. Reproducibility for each case and consistency for each grader were assessed with a two-way mixed effects intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). An ICC below 0.4 was deemed poor to fair, an ICC of 0.41 to 0.60 was moderate, an ICC of 0.6 to 0.8 was substantial, and an ICC greater than 0.8 was almost perfect. We also assessed the correlation of scores and the students' clinical experience with a linear regression model and compared mean grades between third- and fourth-year students.

resultsA total of 181 students (156 third- and 25 fourth-year students) were included in the study for a full academic year. Moreover, 6 of 9 cases demonstrated average ICCs more than 0.6 (substantial correlation), and the average ICCs ranged from 0.36 to 0.80 (P<.001 for all the cases). The average ICC for each grader was more than 0.60 (substantial correlation). The average grade among the third-year students was 11.9 (SD 4.9), compared with 12.8 (SD 5) among the fourth-year students (P=.005). There was no correlation between clinical experience and OSRE grade (-0.02; P=.48), adjusting for the medical school year.

conclusionsOur OSRE is a reproducible assessment tool with most of our OSRE cases showing substantial correlation, except for 3 cases. No expertise in radiology is needed to grade these examinations using our scoring sheet. There was no correlation between scores and the clinical experience of the medical students tested.

Indexed as

educationeducation methodsmedical educationradiologyundergraduate

Identifiers

PMID32374267
PMCPMC7240440

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.