This study aimed to estab.lish the influence, or not, of negotiated scoring and gender in a high stakes General Practice examination assessing communication skills. The dataset comprised 1024 simulated consultations. Final Year medical students undertook VOICEs - a six-station OSCE-style examination. Two stations involved role played consultations. Aspects of communication ~ including attitudes - were scored by nego~iation between a clinician and the role player, using holistic descriptive statements. Scorers' independent perceptions and agreed scores were collected. to analyse influence. Also, participants' gender (examiner, 'patient' and student) was recorded. Other demographic/performance-related variables were included and coded for analysis. Data were initially analysed using established statistical testing, but later analysed using Generalised Linear Modelling, to probe questions outstanding from the original analyses. Results showed the examination process to be internally consistent, suggesting good reliability. The majority of null hypotheses relating to bias were upheld. Student gender was persistently significant in individual tests, but not in GLM. The role players' contribution did not bias the examination, and in some cases was more consistent that the GP scoring. Results relating to question content were not significant, but did raise interesting questions about managing uncertainty and the relationship between communication (skills) and content (knowledge/expertise).
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:487499 |
| Date | January 2007 |
| Creators | Wiskin, Connie Mary |
| Publisher | University of Birmingham |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds