Author:
Tolsma Rachael,Shebrain Saad,Berry Shamsi Daneshvari,Miller Lisa
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Components factoring into general surgery clerkship grades vary by institution, and while evaluators attempt to remain unbiased when evaluating medical student performance, subjectivity and implicit bias remain an issue. Our institution recently implemented a case-based structured oral examination to provide the general surgery clerkship director objective insight into students’ clinical reasoning skills. We hypothesized that medical students believe this exam, along with graded clinical documentation and the Observed Standardized Clinical Encounter (OSCE), are fair assessments and increase students’ awareness of their clinical reasoning skills.
Methods
A survey was sent to third-year medical students in the classes of 2023 and 2024 at our institution who had completed their general surgery clerkship. Students rated five grading assessments (i.e., preceptor evaluations, the oral examination, clinical documentation, the OSCE, and the shelf exam) on fairness and the ability of the assessment to give them insight into their clinical reasoning on a five-point Likert scale 1–5 (with 1 = Strongly Agree, 5 = Strongly Disagree).
Results
One hundred and ten of 162 (67.9%) students responded to the survey. The shelf examination was the most highly regarded assessment tool followed by the oral examination. Seventy-three percent agreed or strongly agreed that the oral exam was a fair assessment, and 80% agreed or strongly agreed that it gave them insight into their clinical reasoning skills. Alternatively, only 41.8% of students agreed or strongly agreed that preceptor evaluations were fair assessments and 42.7% agreed or strongly agreed that it gave them insight into their clinical reasoning.
Conclusions
Third-year medical students on a general surgery clerkship favor the shelf examination and a case-based oral examination over other assessment tools regarding fairness and perception of their clinical reasoning. This type of examination can provide general surgery clerkship directors with additional objective data to assess medical students more fairly and improve students’ clinical reasoning.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference27 articles.
1. Results of the 2021 NRMP program director survey. 2021. Available from: www.nrmp.org. Accessed 22 May 2022.
2. Assessment methods in clinical clerkship experiences (Formative and/or summative) | AAMC [Internet]. Available from: https://www.aamc.org/data-reports/curriculum-reports/interactive-data/assessment-methods-clinical-clerkship-experiences-formative-and/or-summative. Accessed 27 Oct 2021.
3. Takeshita J, Wang S, Loren AW, Mitra N, Shults J, Shin DB, et al. Association of racial/ethnic and gender concordance between patients and physicians with patient experience ratings. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(11):e2024583. Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2772682.
4. CJD W, Jerath A, Coburn N, Klaassen Z, Luckenbaugh AN, Magee DE, et al. Association of surgeon-patient sex concordance with postoperative outcomes. JAMA Surg. 2022;157(2):146. Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC8655669/
5. Low D, Pollack SW, Liao ZC, Maestas R, Kirven LE, Eacker AM, et al. Racial/ethnic disparities in clinical grading in medical school. Teach Learn Med. 2019;31(5):487–96. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31032666/