Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35445035›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2022

Virtual OSCE Delivery and Quality Assurance During a Pandemic: Implications for the Future.

Shannon L Saad, Cassandra Richmond, Karina Jones, Michelle Schlipalius, Helen Rienits, Bunmi S Malau-Aduli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Perceptions of the usefulness of an online simulated clinical examination.International journal of medical education · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Feasibility and reliability of the pandemic-adapted online-onsite hybrid graduation OSCE in Japan.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  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

6 authors.

Shannon L SaadSchool of Medicine, Notre Dame University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Cassandra RichmondSchool of Medicine, Notre Dame University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Karina JonesCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.
Michelle SchlipaliusSchool of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Helen RienitsSchool of Medicine, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
Bunmi S Malau-AduliCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: During 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic caused worldwide disruption to the delivery of clinical assessments, requiring medicals schools to rapidly adjust their design of established tools. Derived from the traditional face-to-face Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), the virtual OSCE (vOSCE) was delivered online, using a range of school-dependent designs. The quality of these new formats was evaluated remotely through virtual quality assurance (vQA). This study synthesizes the vOSCE and vQA experiences of stakeholders from participating Australian medical schools based on a Quality framework. Methods: This study utilized a descriptive phenomenological qualitative design. Focus group discussions (FGD) were held with 23 stakeholders, including examiners, academics, simulated patients, professional staff, students and quality assurance examiners. The data was analyzed using a theory-driven conceptual Quality framework. Results: The vOSCE was perceived as a relatively fit-for purpose assessment during pandemic physical distancing mandates. Additionally, the vOSCE was identified as being value-for-money and was noted to provide procedural benefits which lead to an enhanced experience for those involved. However, despite being largely delivered fault-free, the current designs are considered limited in the scope of skills they can assess, and thus do not meet the established quality of the traditional OSCE. Conclusions: Whilst virtual clinical assessments are limited in their scope of assessing clinical competency when compared with the traditional OSCE, their integration into programs of assessment does, in fact, have significant potential. Scholarly review of stakeholder experiences has elucidated quality aspects that can inform iterative improvements to the design and implementation of future vOSCEs.

Indexed as

clinical assessmentpandemic/COVID-19quality assuranceQuality frameworkvirtual OSCE

Identifiers

PMID35445035
PMCPMC9013903

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.