Formative objective structured clinical examination with immediate feedback improves surgical clerks’ self-confidence and clinical competence
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Clerkship is crucial for fourth-year medical students before entering the clinical environment. However, lack of confidence impairs clerks' performance during the clinical rotation. We assess the impact of formative Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) with immediate feedback on surgical clerks' self-confidence and clinical competence. METHODS: = 19), where an extra 6-station formative OSCE was given prior to the surgical rotation with immediate feedback on the participant's performance. Self-confidence assessment (SCA) was collected from each participant before, right after the formative OSCE and one month later. Clinical competence was assessed using a mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) with a case of acute abdominal pain and direct observation of procedural skills (DOPS) with incision and suture one month later. RESULTS: The SCAs were significantly improved in the OSCE group right after the training, and a month later, compared to the control group. The mini-CEX score was significantly higher in the OSCE group compared to the control group, but not the DOPS score of incision and suture. CONCLUSION: The formative OSCE with immediate feedback could significantly enhance surgical clerks' self-confidence and their clinical competence when taking the history, performing the physical examination, and in clinical reasoning; however, the formative OSCE did not improve their dexterity in performing the procedural skills.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A structured feedback loop ensures that learning is active and responsive, adapting to individual needs.
“This structured feedback loop ensures that learning is active and responsive, adapting to individual needs [98,99].”
From Formative assessment and feedback in medical education: A practical guide: AMEE Guide No. 189 (2026) · cites this paper as [99]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 20
- Authors
- Luo, P., Shen, J., Yu, T., Zhang, X., Zheng, B., & Yang, J.
- Affiliations
- Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital (CN)
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Zheng, Bin
- Yang, Jin
- Venue
- Medical Teacher
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2022-09-23
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 212-218
- ISSN
- 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-187X
- OpenAlex
- W4297183522
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8
- FWCI
- 3.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Medical Teacher (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (LQ20H160038)
- Collaborative Education Project of Industry University Cooperation of the Ministry of Education (202102177006)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- OSCE, immediate feedback, surgical clerkship, self-confidence, clinical competence, medical students, Mini-CEX, Direct Observation of Procedural Skills, procedural skills, clinical reasoning, medical history, physical examination
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Clerkship, Clinical Competence, Educational Measurement, Feedback, Humans, Physical Examination, Prospective Studies
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