Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39639632›Full record

Observational studyKorean journal of medical education2024

Improving process aspect of oral examination as assessment tool in undergraduate biochemistry by introducing structured oral examination: an observational study in India based on a survey among stakeholders.

Rinchu Loomba, Nandita Maini Jindal

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Korean journal of medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Rinchu LoombaDepartment of Biochemistry, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, India.
Nandita Maini JindalDepartment of Biochemistry, Christian Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe traditional method of oral examination, though a good tool for assessing the depth and breadth of student's knowledge, has its shortcomings. A variable number of questions with variable difficulty levels by different examiners with different expectations can introduce bias in scores. The process aspect of oral examinations of first-year undergraduate medical students was improved by structuring them and by creating uniformity in the number, time, and difficulty level of questions for assessment, and feedback was taken regarding its acceptance as an improved tool of assessment.

methodsAfter finalizing the topics, questions from a viva viewpoint were structured and categorized into three difficulty levels covering all aspects of chosen topics validated by subject experts. The number of questions asked per difficulty level, time, and marks given to each question was pre-decided. After briefing the students, the structured viva was conducted, and feedback was taken from students and examiners.

resultsThe majority (87%) of first-year undergraduate students undertook the structured viva and filled in the feedback form. Nearly all students felt that the structured oral examination was a fair and unbiased assessment tool with less subjectivity compared to traditional viva. Most students (83.9%) felt that the topics were comprehensively covered, and 96.4% of students felt less stressed. Among examiners, there was 100% agreement on the uniformity of questions asked, topics covered, less subjectivity, and no carryover effect.

conclusionThe examiners have accepted it as one of the formative assessment tools for future batches of students and are ready to explore its utility as a summative assessment tool.

Indexed as

BiochemistryEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalFeedbackFemaleHumansIndiaStakeholder ParticipationSurveys and QuestionnairesBiochemistryCurriculumMedical educationUndergraduate

Identifiers

PMID39639632
PMCPMC11625900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.