MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415999608 · doi:10.1177/23821205251393853

Empowering Tomorrow's Trainers: Engaging Senior Pediatric Residents as Co-Developers of OSCEs for Junior Peers

2025· article· en· W4415999608 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hasan Ghandourah, Sami Al-Nasser, Abdullah Alzahem

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Education and Curricular Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeer mentoringPeer groupMEDLINEConfidentialityProfessional development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Implementing Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) as formative educational activities significantly affects postgraduate trainees but could involve challenges to human and financial resources. This study explored senior pediatric residents' experiences in developing and conducting OSCE stations for their junior peers to elucidate the reciprocal benefits of involving senior residents in this educational partnership. Design and methods: This qualitative study employed a thematic analysis approach in training senior residents to develop and administer OSCEs following adequate training and supervision. After the OSCE implementation, residents reflected on their experiences. In-depth interviews were conducted using a semi-structured interview guide with the 19 senior pediatric residents who had completed the study. Audio recordings of the interviews were transcribed using a descriptive method, and thematic analysis of the data was performed using NVivo software. Results: Thematic analysis revealed four interrelated themes: 1) the development of OSCE stations, 2) their conduction, 3) self-reflection, and 4) the Canadian Medical Education Directives for Specialties (CanMEDS) roles. Senior residents described the experience as novel and valuable, significantly enhancing their knowledge, skills, and attitudes. They recognized the benefits of teamwork, teaching skills, and increased confidence across various domains. The activities are aligned with the CanMEDS framework, contributing to their development as medical experts. Conclusion: This study highlights how and when senior residents empowered as partners in OSCE design can enhance their development and residency programs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.267
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.434 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Education and Curricular DevelopmentSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207