MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2545907855 · doi:10.5339/qfarc.2016.hbsp2296

Evaluation of a Cumulative Performance-based Assessment for Pharmacy Students in Qatar

2016· article· en· W2545907855 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ahmed Sobh, Kyle John Wilby, Mohamed Izham, Mohammad Diab, Zubin Austin

Notice bibliographique

RevueQatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings Volume 2016 Issue 1 · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueInnovations in Medical Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésObjective structured clinical examinationInter-rater reliabilityChecklistConstruct validityPsychologyPearson product-moment correlation coefficientConcurrent validityReliability (semiconductor)Spearman's rank correlation coefficientMedical educationValidityCorrelationClinical psychologyMedicinePsychometricsStatisticsRating scaleMathematicsDevelopmental psychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are considered the most psychometrically robust form of clinical skills assessment in the health professions. In 2014, the College of Pharmacy at Qatar University (CoP-QU) piloted the first cumulative OSCE for graduating students in collaboration with the Supreme Council of Health and the University of Toronto. Since then, interest has grown in measuring the psychometric properties of this examination to ensure adequate reliability, validity and defensibility. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the OSCE conducted in 2015 at the CoP-QU. A secondary objective of this study was to identify quality improvement opportunities for design, implementation, and evaluation of the OSCE. Methods: The psychometric analysis occurred as follows: We calculated cut scores and pass rates of the 10 stations being used in the OSCE assessment using borderline regression method. Predictive validity of undergraduate courses grades with OSCE grades were calculated using correlation and regression statistics. Concurrent validity of similar cumulative exams were evaluated using Pearson correlation. Risk of bias was calculated using Spearman correlation between assessors' analytical (checklist sheet of required tasks to be performed in a station) and global (the score of whole performance including communication skills on a scale from 1 to 5) scoring. Content validity was assessed quantitatively using 18 student-feedback forms and qualitatively through focus groups with OSCE participants and contributors (total of 5 assessors, 3 students, 3 administrators, 3 standardized patients). Interrater reliability was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Construct validity was evaluated by comparing interrater reliability between the first and second OSCE cycles. Cronbach's alpha was used to determine internal consistency of students' performance in all stations in terms of global and total scores. Correlation statistics were conducted at α level < 0.05. Results: Out of 50% allocated for global score and 50% for analytical score per station, and based on the cut scores calculated for every station, average pass rate per analytical checklist grades in all stations was 70.4%, while average pass rate calculated for total scores in all stations was 79.2%. Four courses simulating professional skills of OSCE, two adapted undergraduate formative OSCEs, and a Medicinal Chemistry course, the control, correlated with the OSCE grades as follow, 0.72 (P < 0.01), 0.47 (P < 0.05), 0.43 (P>0.05), 0.65 (P < 0.01), 0.78 (P < 0.01), 0.61 (P < 0.01), and 0.36 (P>0.05) respectively. OSCE grades can be moderately predicted by Professional skills course grades (52.3%) and its practical assessment (61.2%). Average correlation between analytical and global grades for all assessors was 0.52. A total of 90% of the stations were deemed to reflect practice, according to student perceptions. The average ICC of analytical checklists scores, global scores, and total scores were 0.88 (0.71-0.95), 0.61 (0.19-0.82), and 0.75 (0.45-0.88) respectively. Cronbach's alpha of students' performance in global scores across stations was 0.87, and 0.93 in terms of total scores. Conclusion: The cumulative OSCE conducted in 2015 showed acceptable validity and reliability as a high stakes examination and therefore is suitable to be implemented as a mandatory core curriculum component for student pharmacist assessment in Qatar.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,015
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,735
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0150,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,167
Tête enseignante GPT0,532
Écart entre enseignants0,365 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueQatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings Volume 2016 Issue 1Même sujetInnovations in Medical EducationTravaux en français237 207