Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40537744›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Assessing decision-making skills with the Script Concordance Test (SCT) in clinical neurology and emergency medicine.

Helena-Fee Gudorf, Maximilian Heidrich, Kristoph Rauchstädt, Raphael Scherbaum, Lars Tönges, Anne-Sophie Biesalski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. 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.

Helena-Fee GudorfFaculty of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstrasse 150, Bochum, 44801, Germany.
Maximilian HeidrichFaculty of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstrasse 150, Bochum, 44801, Germany.
Kristoph RauchstädtFaculty of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstrasse 150, Bochum, 44801, Germany.
Raphael ScherbaumFaculty of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstrasse 150, Bochum, 44801, Germany.
Lars TöngesFaculty of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstrasse 150, Bochum, 44801, Germany.
Anne-Sophie BiesalskiFaculty of Medicine, Ruhr University Bochum, Universitätsstrasse 150, Bochum, 44801, Germany. anne-sophie.biesalski@rub.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical reasoning is an essential medical competence that should be taught and assessed from the beginning of medical studies. These skills can be evaluated using the Script Concordance Test (SCT), which presents daily clinical scenarios characterised by uncertainty. Due to the lack of validated research on this method in Germany, particularly in the field of neurology, we developed and implemented an SCT at Ruhr University Bochum. We compared different teaching methods (clinical seminar vs. digital video course) and their outcomes on the examination.

methodsA group of 6th-year medical students who had received the same education completed an SCT after participating in either a clinical seminar or a digital video course. The SCT was developed using blueprints on stroke and epilepsy. The test consisted of 40 case vignettes with a total of 120 items. Initially, experts completed the test to establish the reference panel. The final high-stakes examination was created using the aggregate scoring method and an item analysis.

resultsThe SCT was completed by 15 experts and 59 students. The final SCT consisted of 112 items and achieved a Cronbach's alpha of 0.85. A significant difference (p < 0.05) was observed between the experts, who achieved a mean score of 81.75, and the students on the first assessment day, who achieved a mean score of 68.92. No significant differences were found between the groups (interactive video course and seminar) or assessment time points. The questionnaire revealed a sense of insecurity in clinical decision-making before the SCT and highlighted the need to incorporate clinical reasoning practices from the beginning of medical studies to mitigate fear in uncertain situations. The SCT helped students structure decision-making processes and and improved their confidence in making decisions.

conclusionThe SCT is a reliable and valid tool for assessing medical students throughout their university education. Regular exposure to the SCT format would facilitate familiarity with its structure. We propose utilising the SCT as a learning tool rather than solely for assessment purposes. For instance, it could be integrated into teaching methodologies as a think-aloud exercise or incorporated into progress tests.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceClinical Decision-MakingDecision MakingEducational MeasurementEmergency MedicineNeurologyClinical ReasoningFemaleGermanyHumansMaleStudents, MedicalClinical reasoningDecision-making SkillsDigital video courseEmergency medicineNeurologyScript concordance test

Identifiers

PMID40537744
PMCPMC12180276

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.