Mondal R, Sarkar S, Nandi M, Hazra A
Department of Pediatrics, NBMCH, Darjeeling.
Kathmandu Univ Med J (KUMJ). 2012 Jan-Mar;10(37):62-5. doi: 10.3126/kumj.v10i1.6917.
The use of objective structured clinical examination in pediatrics is not common in undergraduate evaluation process.
To evaluate the effectiveness of objective structured clinical examination as compare to conventional examination as formative assessment tool in Pediatrics.
We conducted a cross sectional comparative study in defined population of 9th semester MBBS students to evaluate the effectiveness of objective structured clinical examination as comparison to conventional examination as formative assessment tool in Pediatrics. We analyzed the perception of objective structured clinical examination among the students.
Fifty-two students appeared for the objective structured clinical examination evaluation on the first day and 42 turned up for conventional examination on the next day. The 42 students who turned up for both examinations were asked to respond to the perception evaluation questionnaire. Comparison of the two examination styles showed that students fared better in objective structured clinical examination than in conventional examination both with respect to mean total score (p less than 0.001) as well as mean percentage score. Out of the 42 subjects who appeared in both examinations, all passed in objective structured clinical examination and 35 passed in conventional examination, this difference was significant by McNemar chi-square test (p = 0.016). 73.8% of the students opined in favor of objective structured clinical examination as a better formative assessment tool whereas 9.5% students preferred conventional examination.
Objective structured clinical examination a statistically significant better evaluation tool with comparison to conventional examination.
在本科评估过程中，客观结构化临床考试在儿科学中的应用并不常见。
评估客观结构化临床考试与传统考试相比，作为儿科学形成性评估工具的有效性。
我们在已确定的第九学期医学学士学生群体中进行了一项横断面比较研究，以评估客观结构化临床考试与传统考试相比，作为儿科学形成性评估工具的有效性。我们分析了学生对客观结构化临床考试的看法。
第一天有52名学生参加了客观结构化临床考试评估，第二天有42名学生参加了传统考试。要求参加这两项考试的42名学生回答看法评估问卷。两种考试方式的比较表明，学生在客观结构化临床考试中的表现优于传统考试，无论是平均总分（p小于0.001）还是平均百分比得分。在参加两项考试的42名受试者中，所有人在客观结构化临床考试中通过，35人在传统考试中通过，通过McNemar卡方检验，这种差异具有统计学意义（p = 0.016）。73.8%的学生认为客观结构化临床考试是更好的形成性评估工具，而9.5%的学生更喜欢传统考试。
与传统考试相比，客观结构化临床考试是一种具有统计学显著优势的更好的评估工具。
