Objective structured clinical examination for pharmacy students in Qatar: cultural and contextual barriers to assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and psychometric defensibility of implementing a comprehensive objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) on the complete pharmacy programme for pharmacy students in a Middle Eastern context, and to identify facilitators and barriers to implementation within new settings. Eight cases were developed, validated, and had standards set according to a blueprint, and were assessed with graduating pharmacy students. Assessor reliability was evaluated using inter-class coefficients (ICCs). Concurrent validity was evaluated by comparing OSCE results to professional skills course grades. Field notes were maintained to generate recommendations for implementation in other contexts. The examination pass mark was 424 points out of 700 (60.6%). All 23 participants passed. Mean performance was 74.6%. Low to moderate inter-rater reliability was obtained for analytical and global components (average ICC 0.77 and 0.48, respectively). In conclusion, OSCE was feasible in Qatar but context-related validity and reliability concerns must be addressed prior to future iterations in Qatar and elsewhere.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it