首页> 外文期刊>Medical education >Using borderline methods to compare passing standards for OSCEs at graduation across three medical schools.
【24h】

Using borderline methods to compare passing standards for OSCEs at graduation across three medical schools.

机译:使用边界方法比较三所医学院毕业时的OSCE通过标准。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

CONTEXT: Medical schools in the UK set their own graduating examinations and pass marks. In a previous study we examined the equivalence of passing standards using the Angoff standard-setting method. To address the limitation this imposed on that work, we undertook further research using a standard-setting method specifically designed for objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). METHODS: Six OSCE stations were incorporated into the graduating examinations of 3 of the medical schools that took part in the previous study. The borderline group method (BGM) or borderline regression method (BRM) was used to derive the pass marks for all stations in the OSCE. We compared passing standards at the 3 schools. We also compared the results within the schools with their previously generated Angoff pass marks. RESULTS: The pass marks derived using the BGM or BRM were consistent across 2 of the 3 schools, whereas the third school generated pass marks which were (with a single exception) much lower. Within-school comparisons of pass marks revealed that in 2 schools the pass marks generally did not significantly differ using either method, but for 1 school the Angoff mark was consistently and significantly lower than the BRM. DISCUSSION: The pass marks set using the BGM or BRM were more consistent across 2 of the 3 medical schools than pass marks set using the Angoff method. However, 1 medical school set significantly different pass marks from the other 2 schools. Although this study is small, we conclude that passing standards at different medical schools cannot be guaranteed to be equivalent.
机译:背景:英国的医学院设立了自己的毕业考试和合格分数。在先前的研究中,我们使用Angoff标准制定方法检查了通过标准的等效性。为了解决这项工作受到的限制,我们使用专门为客观结构化临床检查(OSCE)设计的标准制定方法进行了进一步的研究。方法:六个OSCE站被纳入参加先前研究的3所医学院校的毕业考试中。使用边界线组方法(BGM)或边界线回归方法(BRM)来导出OSCE中所有站点的通过标记。我们比较了3所学校的及格标准。我们还将学校内部的结果与以前生成的Angoff及格分数进行了比较。结果:使用BGM或BRM得出的及格分数在3所学校中的2所保持一致,而第三所学校所产生的及格分数要低得多(唯一的例外)。在校内通过标记的比较发现,在2所学校中,使用两种方法的通过标记通常都没有显着差异,但是对于1所学校,Angoff标记始终且显着低于BRM。讨论:在3所医学院中,有2所使用BGM或BRM设置的通过标记比使用Angoff方法设置的通过标记更一致。但是,一所医学院的合格分数与其他2所医学院的显着不同。尽管这项研究规模很小,但我们得出的结论是,不能保证不同医学院校的及格标准相同。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号