MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402974343 · doi:10.2196/57772

Knowledge Mapping and Global Trends in the Field of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination: Bibliometric and Visual Analysis (2004-2023)

2024· article· en· W4402974343 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hongjun Ba, Lili Zhang, Xiufang He, Shujuan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObjective structured clinical examinationCompetence (human resources)Medical educationLibrary sciencePsychologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a pivotal tool for assessing health care professionals and plays an integral role in medical education. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to map the bibliometric landscape of OSCE research, highlighting trends and key influencers. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted for materials related to OSCE from January 2004 to December 2023, using the Web of Science Core Collection database. Bibliometric analysis and visualization were performed with VOSviewer and CiteSpace software tools. RESULTS: Our analysis indicates a consistent increase in OSCE-related publications over the study period, with a notable surge after 2019, culminating in a peak of activity in 2021. The United States emerged as a significant contributor, responsible for 30.86% (1626/5268) of total publications and amassing 44,051 citations. Coauthorship network analysis highlighted robust collaborations, particularly between the United States and the United Kingdom. Leading journals in this domain-BMC Medical Education, Medical Education, Academic Medicine, and Medical Teacher-featured the highest volume of papers, while The Lancet garnered substantial citations, reflecting its high impact factor (to be verified for accuracy). Prominent authors in the field include Sondra Zabar, Debra Pugh, Timothy J Wood, and Susan Humphrey-Murto, with Ronaldo M Harden, Brian D Hodges, and George E Miller being the most cited. The analysis of key research terms revealed a focus on "education," "performance," "competence," and "skills," indicating these are central themes in OSCE research. CONCLUSIONS: The study underscores a dynamic expansion in OSCE research and international collaboration, spotlighting influential countries, institutions, authors, and journals. These elements are instrumental in steering the evolution of medical education assessment practices and suggest a trajectory for future research endeavors. Future work should consider the implications of these findings for medical education and the potential areas for further investigation, particularly in underrepresented regions or emerging competencies in health care training.

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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.069
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.445 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207