ArticleCureus2025
Assessing the Feasibility and Acceptability of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in Undergraduate Surgical Training: A Pilot Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Developing clinical skills assessment modules for traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine in Korea: a participatory action research study.Journal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is central to competency-based medical education, yet its adoption in resource-limited general surgery settings is underexplored. This pilot study assessed the feasibility, reliability, and acceptability of implementing an OSCE in India's National Medical Council (NMC)-mandated undergraduate curriculum.
methodsA prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary hospital's general surgery department over six months. Twenty-eight MBBS students and 15 faculty participated. Three OSCE stations assessed pancreatitis management, Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) primary survey, and history-taking for abdominal pain, using standardized checklists and rating scales. Faculty underwent calibration workshops. Reliability was assessed with Cronbach's α and Cohen's κ. Stakeholder feedback was evaluated through structured surveys.
resultsStudent performance differed significantly across stations (F = 6.21, p = 0.002); the ATLS station had the highest scores (9.1 ± 0.8). Internal consistency was strong (Cronbach's α: students 0.84, faculty 0.79), and inter-rater reliability improved post training (κ: 0.42 to 0.78). Female students excelled in communication (p = 0.023). OSCEs caused less stress than traditional exams (p < 0.001), and greater preparation correlated with reduced stress. Student satisfaction reached 92.9%, but faculty reported limited resources (2.9/5). Prior OSCE experience among faculty improved station realism (p = 0.015).
conclusionOSCEs in general surgery were feasible, reliable, and well-accepted by students but highlighted the need for better resources, robust faculty training, and institutional support for scalability and sustainability.
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.