Cited by 20Innovations in Medical EducationClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic SkillsMusculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation

Formative objective structured clinical examination with immediate feedback improves surgical clerks’ self-confidence and clinical competence

Luo, Peng, Shen, Jiliang, Yu, Tunan, Zhang, Xiaochen, Zheng, Bin, Yang, Jin·2023·Medical Teacher

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

Crossref · 10.1080/0142159x.2022.2126755

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

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
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