Validity Study of an End-of-Clerkship Oral Examination in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Medical student perceptions of assessments of clinical reasoning in a general surgery clerkship

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.

The Use of Structured Oral Exams for the Assessment of Medical Students in their Radiology Clerkship

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVES

There is increasing interest in narrative feedback and competency-based evaluation in medical student education. This study evaluates the implementation of a structured oral exam for a required radiology clerkship in furtherance of these aims.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A structured oral exam was instituted in academic year (AY) 20-21. Students prepared to discuss 5 varied imaging cases as they would to a medical colleague and as to a patient. For AY 20-21, students took the oral and a written exam. In AY 21-22, students took the oral exam alone and the written exam was discontinued. The perceived educational value of clerkship components, including the oral and written exam, were scored by the students on a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

All students in AY 20-21 received a passing score on the written (mean 89.0, SD 4.59) and oral exams. All students in AY 21-22 received a passing score on the oral exam. In AY 20-21, the educational value of the oral exam was rated significantly higher than that of the written exam (4.30 vs 4.02, P = 0.021). There was no significant difference in rating of the oral exam between AY 20-21 and AY 21-22 (4.30 vs 4.38; P = 0.499).

CONCLUSION

The implementation of a structured final oral exam for a required radiology clerkship was felt to be successful in the aims of delivering educational value while evaluating students for competency. Further evaluation of oral exams for radiology medical student education are warranted to optimize the career preparation of future physicians.