A Team Observed Structured Clinical Encounter (TOSCE) for Pre-Licensure Learners in Maternity Care: A Short Report on the Development of an Assessment Tool for Collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite the support for Interprofessional Education (IPE) among policymakers, educators and professional regulating bodies, the research literature is limited with respect to the evaluation of effective assessment strategies. This short report outlines the development of a Team Observed Structured Clinical Encounter (TOSCE), which brings together learners from three health professions involved in primary care obstetrics-family physicians, midwives, and obstetricians-as a strategy for assessing collaborative competencies.Methods: An interprofessional research team was brought together to develop and implement the TOSCE. The process by which the team generated TOSCE scenario stations is outlined, including the consensus-building process, based on a modified Delphi technique, to include expert input from others in the field of practice.Findings: The scenarios developed by the research team for the TOSCE are highlighted including the assessment criteria, based on the Canadian InterprofessionalHealth Collaborative's National Competency Framework.Conclusions: The TOSCE is an emerging and innovative learning tool that encourages the development of essential collaborative competencies. The process of developing a TOSCE outlined in this report offers an affordable, streamlined approach that could be used by educators in many disciplines as a summative or formative assessment strategy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".