359 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30575092)
1. Developing a video-based method to compare and adjust examiner effects in fully nested OSCEs.
Yeates P; Cope N; Hawarden A; Bradshaw H; McCray G; Homer M
Med Educ; 2019 Mar; 53(3):250-263. PubMed ID: 30575092
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Measuring the Effect of Examiner Variability in a Multiple-Circuit Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE).
Yeates P; Moult A; Cope N; McCray G; Xilas E; Lovelock T; Vaughan N; Daw D; Fuller R; McKinley RKB
Acad Med; 2021 Aug; 96(8):1189-1196. PubMed ID: 33656012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Using video-based examiner score comparison and adjustment (VESCA) to compare the influence of examiners at different sites in a distributed objective structured clinical exam (OSCE).
Yeates P; Maluf A; Cope N; McCray G; McBain S; Beardow D; Fuller R; McKinley RB
BMC Med Educ; 2023 Oct; 23(1):803. PubMed ID: 37885005
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Determining the influence of different linking patterns on the stability of students' score adjustments produced using Video-based Examiner Score Comparison and Adjustment (VESCA).
Yeates P; McCray G; Moult A; Cope N; Fuller R; McKinley R
BMC Med Educ; 2022 Jan; 22(1):41. PubMed ID: 35039023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Hawks, Doves and Rasch decisions: Understanding the influence of different cycles of an OSCE on students' scores using Many Facet Rasch Modeling.
Yeates P; Sebok-Syer SS
Med Teach; 2017 Jan; 39(1):92-99. PubMed ID: 27897083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Objectivity in subjectivity: do students' self and peer assessments correlate with examiners' subjective and objective assessment in clinical skills? A prospective study.
Inayah AT; Anwer LA; Shareef MA; Nurhussen A; Alkabbani HM; Alzahrani AA; Obad AS; Zafar M; Afsar NA
BMJ Open; 2017 May; 7(5):e012289. PubMed ID: 28487454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Enhancing authenticity, diagnosticity and
Yeates P; Maluf A; Kinston R; Cope N; McCray G; Cullen K; O'Neill V; Cole A; Goodfellow R; Vallender R; Chung CW; McKinley RK; Fuller R; Wong G
BMJ Open; 2022 Dec; 12(12):e064387. PubMed ID: 36600366
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Sources of variation in performance on a shared OSCE station across four UK medical schools.
Chesser A; Cameron H; Evans P; Cleland J; Boursicot K; Mires G
Med Educ; 2009 Jun; 43(6):526-32. PubMed ID: 19493176
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Standardized examinees: development of a new tool to evaluate factors influencing OSCE scores and to train examiners.
Zimmermann P; Kadmon M
GMS J Med Educ; 2020; 37(4):Doc40. PubMed ID: 32685668
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Undesired variance due to examiner stringency/leniency effect in communication skill scores assessed in OSCEs.
Harasym PH; Woloschuk W; Cunning L
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2008 Dec; 13(5):617-32. PubMed ID: 17610034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Exploration of a possible relationship between examiner stringency and personality factors in clinical assessments: a pilot study.
Finn Y; Cantillon P; Flaherty G
BMC Med Educ; 2014 Dec; 14():1052. PubMed ID: 25551778
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparison of student examiner to faculty examiner scoring and feedback in an OSCE.
Moineau G; Power B; Pion AM; Wood TJ; Humphrey-Murto S
Med Educ; 2011 Feb; 45(2):183-91. PubMed ID: 21166691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Predictive validity of a tool to resolve borderline grades in OSCEs.
Klein Nulend R; Harris P; Shulruf B
GMS J Med Educ; 2020; 37(3):Doc31. PubMed ID: 32566733
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Using the Many-Facet Rasch Model to analyse and evaluate the quality of objective structured clinical examination: a non-experimental cross-sectional design.
Tavakol M; Pinner G
BMJ Open; 2019 Sep; 9(9):e029208. PubMed ID: 31494607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessment of examiner leniency and stringency ('hawk-dove effect') in the MRCP(UK) clinical examination (PACES) using multi-facet Rasch modelling.
McManus IC; Thompson M; Mollon J
BMC Med Educ; 2006 Aug; 6():42. PubMed ID: 16919156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Order effects in high stakes undergraduate examinations: an analysis of 5 years of administrative data in one UK medical school.
Burt J; Abel G; Barclay M; Evans R; Benson J; Gurnell M
BMJ Open; 2016 Oct; 6(10):e012541. PubMed ID: 27729351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Towards a more nuanced conceptualisation of differential examiner stringency in OSCEs.
Homer M
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2024 Jul; 29(3):919-934. PubMed ID: 37843678
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The efficacy of peer assessment in objective structured clinical examinations for formative feedback: a preliminary study.
Kim KJ; Kim G
Korean J Med Educ; 2020 Mar; 32(1):59-65. PubMed ID: 32130851
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Awarding global grades in OSCEs: evaluation of a novel eLearning resource for OSCE examiners.
Gormley GJ; Johnston J; Thomson C; McGlade K
Med Teach; 2012; 34(7):587-9. PubMed ID: 22632277
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. LUCAS: a theoretically informed instrument to assess clinical communication in objective structured clinical examinations.
Huntley CD; Salmon P; Fisher PL; Fletcher I; Young B
Med Educ; 2012 Mar; 46(3):267-76. PubMed ID: 22324526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
