Cited by 9Innovations in Medical EducationSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Triangulation of Multifactorial Assessment: Bringing Objectivity to Objective Structured Clinical Examination Evaluation

Ling, Catherine, Fuller, Andrea, Taylor, Laura, Johnson, Heather·2018·Clinical Simulation in Nursing

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ecns.2017.10.009

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ling, C., Fuller, A., Taylor, L., & Johnson, H.
Affiliations
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Ling, Catherine
Venue
Clinical Simulation in Nursing
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-03
Volume
16
Pages
40-47
ISSN
1876-1399 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2775018733
Cited by
9
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Clinical Simulation in Nursing (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
OSCE, triangulation, nursing education, clinical evaluation, standardized patients, observation rubrics, student feedback, remediation, graduate nursing students, assessment objectivity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review