MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1891470713 · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2015.1075647

OSCE circuit performance effects: Does circuit order influence scores?

2015· article· en· W1891470713 on OpenAlexafffund
Sandra Monteiro, Allyn Walsh, Lawrence Grierson

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsTouchstone Exploration (Canada)McMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsObjective structured clinical examinationPsychologyTest (biology)Order (exchange)Subject (documents)Medical educationComputer scienceSocial psychologyMedicineBusinessWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is not uncommon for medical students to raise concerns over the difficulty of a single station within an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE), particularly when they feel they were subject to an unfair situation. Indeed, test developers also share these concerns about the possibility that a single extremely difficult station may impact student performance on the station that follows. As a reaction to the concerns of both students and examiners, we conducted a study, analyzing the scores of multiple OSCEs. Although our analyses did not support the complaints of unfairness targeted at the OSCE, we feel it is a rather enlightening story nevertheless, and one worth sharing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207