Comparison of criterion-based checklist scoring and global rating scales for the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in pre- clinical year medical students
Wan, S., Canalese, R., Lam, L., Petersen, R., Quinlivan, J., & Frost, G. (2011). Comparison of criterion-based checklist scoring and global rating scales for the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in pre- clinical year medical students. Medical Education, 45(Supp 3:1). doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04089.x
Introduction: Different scoring systems have been employed in the marking of OSCE. The aim of the study was to compare the use of the criterion-based checklist scoring with the examiners’ global rating scales in the OSCE.
Methods: We examined 2 cohorts of 221 graduate-entry medical students across 2 years (Year 1 in 2008 and Year 1 & 2 in 2009) using OSCE. Each station’s marking guide consisted of a detailed criterion-based checklist of items examined in the particular case. The passing mark for each station was determined using the modified Angoff’s method. A separate global rating scale (Fail, Borderline, Pass, very Satisfactory) was included for the examiner to record the global assessment. The Spearman co-relation co-efficient between the criterion-based marking and the global rating was calculated.
Results: The Pearson’s correlations between the criterion-based marking and the global rating for all stations in the 3 OSCE across the 2 years were highly significant (p
Conclusion: This revealed that using global rating might be another reliable assessment method in OSCE. Examiner experience in OSCE is an important factor to be considered before full implementation. Limitation of using this global rating scale in OSCE includes difficulty in defending the marking in case of an appeal especially for high-stake exit examinations.