ArticleEvaluation & the health professions2023
Comparability of Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) and Written Tests for Assessing Medical School Students' Competencies: A Scoping Review.
Article in Evaluation & the health professions, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reforming hospital management education with the P-MASE pedagogy: a randomized controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Evaluating the Influence of MCAT Scores on Medical Student Selection and Performance Using a Machine Learning Approach: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Correlation of the Cognitive, Psychomotor and Affective Domains of Professionalism Assessment in Dental Graduates.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- International Benchmarking of Pharmacology Curricula and Prescribing Related Learning Outcomes, Implications for Australian Health Professional Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Application of scenario simulation based on boppps model in physical diagnostics--a practical exploration of integrated teaching mode for cardiac physical examination and electrocardiogram.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Endodontic Education: A Systematic Review with Frequentist and Bayesian Meta-Analysis of Student-Based Evidence.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Review
- Effectiveness evaluation of a serious game for dental lost wax casting training.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Charting the use of mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) in nursing and dental education: a bibliometric analysis from the Web of Science database.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2025Article
- Nurse educators' satisfaction with online Objective Structured Clinical Examination scoring system.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) and written tests are commonly used to assess health professional students, but it remains unclear whether the additional human resources and expenses required for OSCEs, both in-person and online, are worthwhile for assessing competencies. This scoping review summarized literature identified by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE comparing 1) OSCEs and written tests and 2) in-person and online OSCEs, for assessing health professional trainees' competencies. For Q1, 21 studies satisfied inclusion criteria. The most examined health profession was medical trainees (19, 90.5%), the comparison was most frequently OSCEs versus multiple-choice questions (MCQs) (18, 85.7%), and 18 (87.5%) examined the same competency domain. Most (77.5%) total score correlation coefficients between testing methods were weak (
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.