ArticleBMC medical education2025
Understanding students' self-efficacy and motivation in sequential OSCE: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundWith the introduction of the UK Medical Licensing Assessment (UKMLA), many medical schools have adopted a sequential Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) format to evaluate clinical competence more efficiently. Sequential testing was designed to improve diagnostic accuracy and maximise the effectiveness of testing resources by administering a relatively shorter screening test for all students, followed by a confirmation test only for students who did not meet the passing threshold of the first test. While its psychometric robustness is well established, little is known about how students experience and interpret this assessment format. This study explores how psychological and contextual factors shape students' self-efficacy, motivation and engagement within sequential OSCEs.
methodsSemi-structured interviews with 22 medical students were conducted following two full sequences of sequential OSCEs in the third and final year of study. Data were analysed using framework analysis informed by self-efficacy and attribution theory.
resultsStudents described multiple positive sources of self-efficacy, including sequential practice opportunities, peer and senior modelling, verbal reassurance, effective faculty-student communication and well-timed testing intervals. Negative influences included uncertainty about the format, emotional distress, unclear pass threshold, lack of assessment clarity, delayed feedback and insufficient support. Students who viewed sequential testing as a developmental opportunity reported higher confidence and adaptive attributions, whereas those who perceived it as punitive described heightened anxiety and reduced motivation. These patterns reveal an anxiety-achievement paradox - high objective success rates coexisting with persistent psychological stress.
conclusionsSequential OSCEs can support learning when implemented with transparent communication, equitable access to preparation resources, and timely, supportive feedback. Attending to the emotional and motivational dimensions of assessment may improve the educational value of sequential testing and promote student well-being within high-stakes clinical assessment systems.
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.