Progress testing 2.0: clinical skills meets necessary science

Gold, Jonathan; DeMuth, Robin; Mavis, Brian; Wagner, Dianne

doi:10.3402/meo.v20.27769

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, the student may have to write a note about the patient or answer some questions about the basic science underlying the patient’s complaint. Gold and his colleagues describe the PCSE in more detail (Gold et al, 2015). The percentage of items correct was used as the outcome measure in both sets of written examinations.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attendance, engagement and performance in a medical school curriculum: early findings from competency-based progress testing in a new medical school curriculum

Laird-Fick

Solomon

Parker

et al. 2018

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionMedical students often do not value attending in-person large group sessions. It is also not clear from prior research whether attendance at large group sessions impact on performance in medical school. The goal of this study was to assess the relationship between voluntary attendance in large group sessions organized as a “flipped classroom” in a new innovative curriculum and students’ mastery of clinical applications of basic science knowledge.MethodologyOur students’ ability to apply basic science knowledge to clinical problems is assessed via progress testing using three methodologies: a locally developed multiple-choice examination, written examination developed through the National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Customized Assessment Services Program and post encounter questions included in a clinical skills examination. We analyzed the relationship between voluntary attendance at weekly large group “flipped classroom” sessions and the students’ performance on examinations given at four intervals over the initial 24-week module of the medical school curriculum.ResultsComplete data were available for 167 students. A total of 82 students (49.1%) attended all large group sessions, 65 students (38.9%) missed one or two sessions and 20 students (12.0%) missed three or more sessions. There were no difference between the students in the groups on their medical admission (MCAT) examination scores. The growth in performance from each time point until the next was statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference in growth between the students who had no absences and those who had one or two absences. Students who missed three or more sessions performed significantly lower than their peers over the 24 week module and were more likely to score one or more standard deviations below the class mean on the assessments.ConclusionsWe found no relationship between attendance and MCAT scores suggesting the differences in performance on the progress tests was not due to initial differences in knowledge or reasoning skills. While the study was not experimental, it suggests large group sessions using a “flipped classroom” approach to provide reinforcement, feedback and practice may be effective for increasing learning and retention in the application of basic science knowledge among first year medical students.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Attendance, engagement and performance in a medical school curriculum: early findings from competency-based progress testing in a new medical school curriculum

Laird-Fick

Solomon

Parker

et al. 2018

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Descriptions of the development and piloting of the PCSE used in the SDC has been published elsewhere. 7,8 The examination uses an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) format 9 and consists of eight 15-minute Standardized Patient (SP) encounters with 10-minute post encounter stations. Each encounter assesses some combination of patient interaction skills, hypothesis-driven history gathering, physical examination, counseling and safety behaviors using checklist and rating items completed by the SP.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review #1 of "Assessing the growth in clinical skills using a progress clinical skills examination (v0.1)"

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study evaluates the generalizability of an eight-station progress clinical skills examination and assesses the growth in performance for six clinical skills domains among first-and second-year medial students over four time points during the academic year. Methods We conducted a generalizability study for longitudinal and cross-sectional comparisons and assessed growth in six clinical skill domains via repeated measures ANOVA over the first and second year of medical school. Results The generalizability of the examination domain scores was low but consistent with previous studies of data gathering and communication skills. Variations in case difficulty across administrations of the examination made it difficult to assess longitudinal growth. It was possible to compare students at different training levels and the interaction of training level and growth. Second-year students outperformed first-year students, but first-year students' clinical skills performance grew faster than second-year students narrowing the gap in clinical skills over the students' first year of medical school. Conclusions Case specificity limits the ability to assess longitudinal growth in clinical skills through progress testing. Providing students with early clinical skills training and authentic clinical experiences appears to result in the rapid growth of clinical skills during the first year of medical school.

show abstract

“…Gold and his colleagues describe the PCSE in more detail. (Gold et al, 2015) The percentage of items correct was used as the outcome measure in both sets of written examinations. The percentage of possible points that could be achieved in the post encounter stations was used as the outcome measure for the post encounter stations.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Review #2 of "Attendance, engagement and performance in a medical school curriculum: early findings from competency-based progress testing in a new medical school curriculum (v0.1)"

Ban¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Progress testing 2.0: clinical skills meets necessary science

Cited by 11 publications

References 6 publications

Attendance, engagement and performance in a medical school curriculum: early findings from competency-based progress testing in a new medical school curriculum

Attendance, engagement and performance in a medical school curriculum: early findings from competency-based progress testing in a new medical school curriculum

Peer Review #1 of "Assessing the growth in clinical skills using a progress clinical skills examination (v0.1)"

Peer Review #2 of "Attendance, engagement and performance in a medical school curriculum: early findings from competency-based progress testing in a new medical school curriculum (v0.1)"

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About