ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2025
Perception of Medical and Nursing Students Plus Clinical Instructors Towards Objective Structured Clinical Examination: A Case Study of Five Health Training Institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is the gold standard for assessing clinical competencies. However, resource constraints and logistical challenges in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) hinder its effectiveness. This study investigated the perceptions and experiences of medical and nursing students and clinical instructors toward OSCE in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Methods: A mixed-methods sequential explanatory design was utilized involving 686 undergraduate health care students and 46 clinical instructors from Busitema University (Uganda), Mzuzu University (Malawi), University of Ibadan (Nigeria), Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (Ghana), and University of Zambia (Zambia). Quantitative responses were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 25, with comparisons between medical and nursing student responses made using chi-square test. Qualitative data were thematically analyzed. Results: A total of 686 students and 42 clinical instructors participated in the study. Majority of students 57.6% (n = 395, P-value < 0.001) and 71.8% (n = 33) instructors recognized OSCE as a comprehensive tool for assessing clinical skills and knowledge, respectively. Among students, 80.8% (n = 554, P-value = 0.031), 66.6% (n = 457, P-value = 0.001), 66.6% (n = 456, P-value = 0.020) and 61.4% (n = 421, P-value = 0.001) cited anxiety, station timing, examiners' behavior and content load as factors influencing performance. Of the clinical instructors 58.7% (n = 27) noted that it takes longer time to prepare scenarios, however 71.8% (n = 33) highlighted its objectivity. Students praised OSCE's objectivity but criticized insufficient time on some stations and organizational issues. Facilitators cited objectivity and competence assessment but noted resource insufficiencies and student stress. Suggestions for improvement included mock OSCEs, training of clinical instructors, mixed method assessment and feedback to improve performance. Conclusion: In conclusion, while OSCE demonstrates significant strengths in promoting fairness in assessing clinical competencies, addressing logistical challenges, examiner variability, student anxiety, and timely feedback is crucial.
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.