Thakkar Sejal, Chavda Paragkumar, Vahora Roshni, Patel Raksha
Associate Professor (Dermatology), Gujarat Medical Education & Research Society Medical College, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.
Assistant Professor (Community Medicine), Gujarat Medical Education & Research Society Medical College, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.
Med J Armed Forces India. 2021 Feb;77(Suppl 1):S134-S139. doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2020.11.005. Epub 2021 Feb 2.
Dermatology being a visual branch, there is a need to add a visual element in learning and assessment of dermatology. This study compares the utility of image-based assessment (IBA) as a new tool compared to routinely used semi-structured viva (SSV) in dermatology formative assessment at undergraduate level.
Comparison was made between batches of students in year 2018 who underwent clinical posting term ending assessment by IBA with the retrospective cohort of batch of students in year 2015 who underwent assessment by SSV. The students' marks in this assessment and their attendance were collected. Feedback was taken from batch of students who had undergone IBA assessment. Faculty feedback was also taken.
Correlation of attendance with marks was higher in IBA batch compared to SSV. IBA is better able to assess the diagnostic skills which requires visual element and prescription writing skill. SSV can do an authentic assessment of clinical reasoning skills. IBA had higher variability in marks allotted to students suggesting that it was more objective tool whereas with narrow range of marks SSV was found to be more subjective. Both IBA and SSV had similar acceptability by students and faculty. IBA was more resource intensive at preparation stage while SSV was so in conduction stage. IBA had better educational impact, as it promoted learning through exposure to actual patients.
IBA fared better in terms of validity, reliability, acceptability, and educational impact. In terms of feasibility IBA and SSV had differing challenges.
皮肤病学作为一门视觉学科,在皮肤病学的学习和评估中需要增加视觉元素。本研究比较了基于图像的评估(IBA)作为一种新工具与本科阶段皮肤病学形成性评估中常规使用的半结构化口试(SSV)的效用。
对2018年接受IBA临床实习期末评估的学生批次与2015年接受SSV评估的学生回顾性队列进行比较。收集了学生在该评估中的成绩及其出勤率。从接受IBA评估的学生批次中获取反馈。也收集了教师的反馈。
与SSV相比,IBA批次中学生的出勤率与成绩的相关性更高。IBA更能评估需要视觉元素的诊断技能和处方书写技能。SSV可以对临床推理技能进行真实评估。IBA给学生分配的成绩具有更高的变异性,这表明它是更客观的工具,而SSV的成绩范围较窄,被发现更主观。IBA和SSV在学生和教师中具有相似的可接受性。IBA在准备阶段资源消耗更大,而SSV在实施阶段资源消耗更大。IBA具有更好的教育影响,因为它通过接触实际患者促进了学习。
IBA在有效性、可靠性、可接受性和教育影响方面表现更好。在可行性方面,IBA和SSV面临不同的挑战。