文章基本信息

标题：The sights and insights of examiners in objective structured clinical examinations
本地全文：下载
作者：Lauren Chong ; Silas Taylor ; Matthew Haywood 等
期刊名称：Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions
电子版ISSN：1975-5937
出版年度：2017
卷号：14
期号：1
页码：1-8
DOI：10.3352/jeehp.2017.14.34
语种：English
出版社：Korea Health Insurance Licensing Examination Institute
摘要：Purpose:The objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) is considered to be one of the most robust methods of clinical assess_x0002_ment.One of its strengths lies in its ability to minimise the effects of examiner bias due to the standardisation of items and tasks for each candidate.However,OSCE examiners’ assessment scores are influenced by several factors that may jeopardise the assumed objec?tivity of OSCEs.To better understand this phenomenon,the current review aims to determine and describe important sources of ex?aminer bias and the factors affecting examiners’ assessments.Methods:We performed a narrative review of the medical literature us?ing Medline.All articles meeting the selection criteria were reviewed,with salient points extracted and synthesised into a clear and comprehensive summary of the knowledge in this area.Results:OSCE examiners’ assessment scores are influenced by factors belong?ing to 4 different domains:examination context,examinee characteristics,examinee-examiner interactions,and examiner characteris?tics.These domains are composed of several factors including halo,hawk/dove and OSCE contrast effects;the examiner’s gender and ethnicity;training;lifetime experience in assessing;leadership and familiarity with students;station type;and site effects.Conclusion:Several factors may influence the presumed objectivity of examiners’ assessments,and these factors need to be addressed to ensure the objectivity of OSCEs.We offer insights into directions for future research to better understand and address the phenomenon of exam?iner bias.
关键词：Purpose:The objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) is considered to be one of the most robust methods of clinical assess_x0002_ment.One of its strengths lies in its ability to minimise the effects of examiner bias due to the standardisation of items and tasks for each candidate.However,OSCE examiners’ assessment scores are influenced by several factors that may jeopardise the assumed objec?tivity of OSCEs.To better understand this phenomenon,the current review aims to determine and describe important sources of ex?aminer bias and the factors affecting examiners’ assessments.Methods:We performed a narrative review of the medical literature us?ing Medline.All articles meeting the selection criteria were reviewed,with salient points extracted and synthesised into a clear and comprehensive summary of the knowledge in this area.Results:OSCE examiners’ assessment scores are influenced by factors belong?ing to 4 different domains:examination context,examinee characteristics,examinee-examiner interactions,and examiner characteris?tics.These domains are composed of several factors including halo,hawk/dove and OSCE contrast effects;the examiner’s gender and ethnicity;training;lifetime experience in assessing;leadership and familiarity with students;station type;and site effects.Conclusion:Several factors may influence the presumed objectivity of examiners’ assessments,and these factors need to be addressed to ensure the objectivity of OSCEs.We offer insights into directions for future research to better understand and address the phenomenon of exam?iner bias.