Direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) evaluation method: Systematic review of evidence

Background: Evaluation is one of the most important aspects of medical education. Thus, new methods of effective evaluation are required in this area, and direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) is one of these methods. This study was conducted to systematically review the evidence involved in this type of assessment to allow the effective use of this method. Methods: Data were collected searching such keywords as evaluation, assessment, medical education, and direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) on Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct, SID, Medlib and Google and by searching unpublished sources (Gray literature) and selected references (reference of reference). Results: Of 236 papers, 28 were studied. Satisfaction with DOPS method was found to be moderate. The major strengths of this evaluation method are as follow: providing feedback to the participants and promoting independence and practical skills during assessment. However, stressful evaluation, time limitation for participants, and bias between assessors are the main drawbacks of this method. Positive impact of DOPS method on improving student performance has been noted in most studies. The results showed that the validity and reliability of DOPS are relatively acceptable. Performance of participants using DOPS was relatively satisfactory. However, not providing necessary trainings on how to take DOPS test, not providing essential feedback to participants, and insufficient time for the test are the major drawbacks of the DOPS tests. Conclusion: According to the results of this study, DOPS tests can be applied as a valuable and effective evaluation method in medical education. However, more attention should be paid to the quality of these tests.