Objective structured clinical examination versus traditional written examinations: a prospective observational study

Area of Science:

• Medical education research
• Clinical skills assessment
• Student performance evaluation

Background:

• Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) are now mandatory for final-year medical students in France.
• Traditional assessments included written progressive clinical cases (PCC), critical reading of articles (CRA), and internship evaluations (IE).
• This study compares student performance in OSCE exams versus these established evaluation methods.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess the performance of 6-year medical students in final faculty tests.
• To compare scores from OSCE exams with traditional modalities (PCC, CRA, IE).
• To evaluate the impact of OSCE training on student scores.

Main Methods:

• A prospective observational study included 400 medical students from 2020-2021.
• Scores from OSCE-training, OSCE-exams, PCC, CRA, and IE were collected.
• Paired analysis was used to compare all collected scores.

Main Results:

• Mean scores for OSCE exams (12.6±1.7) differed significantly from OSCE-training (11.7±1.7), PCC (13.4±1.4), CRA (13.2±1.5), and IE (14.7±0.9) (p<0.001).
• OSCE exam scores showed moderate correlation with OSCE-training and PCC, and low correlation with CRA and IE.
• A single OSCE training session led to a significant increase in OSCE scores.

Conclusions:

• 6-year medical students scored lower in OSCE exams than in traditional assessments.
• OSCE exams are not redundant with other evaluation methods.
• Specific OSCE training is crucial for improving student performance in these exams.