Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36280805›Full record

ArticleBMC oral health2022

Development of a competency-based clinical assessment instrument for exit level Oral Hygiene students at the University of Western Cape.

M Naidoo, P Brijlal, R Cader, N A Gordon, C A Rayner, K Viljoen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC oral health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

M NaidooFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Hygiene, University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
P BrijlalFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Hygiene, University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa. prbrijlal@uwc.ac.za.
R CaderFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Hygiene, University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
N A GordonFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Hygiene, University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
C A RaynerFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Hygiene, University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
K ViljoenFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Oral Hygiene, University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa.
University of the Western Cape · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Seminal to the process of a health sciences curriculum evaluation is the periodic review of clinical assessment instruments that measure competency. An assessment of quality is facilitated by using a well-structured, authentic and reliable instrument. This process rests on designing and measuring the instrument against a sound framework and validating it for scientific merit. This paper documents the pedagogy and the process taken in developing an improved formative competency-based assessment instrument for the final year students of the Bachelor of Oral Health program (BOH) at the University of the Western Cape (UWC).

methodsA qualitative research study design employing the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) was used as a method for gaining small group consensus on the clinical assessment instrument for exit level Oral Hygiene (BOH3) students within the parameters of assessment principles. The key contributors to the instrument development process were the academic staff of the Department of Oral Hygiene, involved in clinical teaching and assessment of student competency.

resultsThe domains of ethics and professionalism, patient assessment, diagnosis, treatment planning and implementation was identified as the core elements in the assessment. The principles of assessment, which include, alignment with outcomes, feedback, transparency and validity, were used to guide the instrument development. The assessment criteria were cross examined for alignment to the learning outcomes of the module and the program whilst formative feedback was foregrounded as a central feature to support student learning and progress monitoring. Transparency was obtained by providing students access to the instrument before and after the assessment including the written feedback on their performance. The instrument embodied a range of criteria to be assessed rather than on the awarding of a cumulative score. This allowed for the identification of the criteria or domain within which a student is struggling or excelling. Consensus on the instrument design was achieved using the NGT phases throughout the instrument development process including the weighting of the domains and grading. This level of engagement together with the application of scientifically sound assessment principles contributed to the validation of the instrument.

conclusionThe development of a competency-based assessment instrument was the result of a structured, collaborative and scientifically engaged process framed around specific assessment principles. The process culminated in the development of a formative competency-based clinical assessment instrument that was fit for purpose in the Bachelor of Oral Health program.The Nominal Group Technique served to be a valuable approach for small group consensus in developing the instrument. It served to promote individual perspectives and to generate debate and group discussion between academics that were proficient in clinical teaching and, finally to facilitate group consensus on the instrument structure and system for administration.

Indexed as

Competency-Based EducationCurriculumDental HygienistsOral HygieneClinical CompetenceHumansLearningStudentsClinical assessmentInstrument developmentOral hygiene

Identifiers

PMID36280805
PMCPMC9590136
OpenAlexW4307160344

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.