120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37843678)
1. 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]
2. Pass/fail decisions and standards: the impact of differential examiner stringency on OSCE outcomes.
Homer M
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2022 May; 27(2):457-473. PubMed ID: 35230590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Re-conceptualising and accounting for examiner (cut-score) stringency in a 'high frequency, small cohort' performance test.
Homer M
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract; 2021 May; 26(2):369-383. PubMed ID: 32876815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. 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]
6. Borderline grades in high stakes clinical examinations: resolving examiner uncertainty.
Shulruf B; Adelstein BA; Damodaran A; Harris P; Kennedy S; O'Sullivan A; Taylor S
BMC Med Educ; 2018 Nov; 18(1):272. PubMed ID: 30458741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Does Changing Examiner Stations During UK Postgraduate Surgery Objective Structured Clinical Examinations Influence Examination Reliability and Candidates' Scores?
Brennan PA; Croke DT; Reed M; Smith L; Munro E; Foulkes J; Arnett R
J Surg Educ; 2016; 73(4):616-23. PubMed ID: 26923102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. 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]
14. The effect of candidate familiarity on examiner OSCE scores.
Jefferies A; Simmons B; Regehr G
Med Educ; 2007 Sep; 41(9):888-91. PubMed ID: 17727529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. Inter-observer variance of examiner scoring in urology Objective Structured Clinical Examinations.
Touma NJ; Paco CA; MacIntyre I
Can Urol Assoc J; 2024 Apr; 18(4):116-119. PubMed ID: 38381940
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. 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]
18. 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]
19. Is There Variability in Scoring of Student Surgical OSCE Performance Based on Examiner Experience and Expertise?
Donohoe CL; Reilly F; Donnelly S; Cahill RA
J Surg Educ; 2020; 77(5):1202-1210. PubMed ID: 32336628
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Investigating possible ethnicity and sex bias in clinical examiners: an analysis of data from the MRCP(UK) PACES and nPACES examinations.
McManus IC; Elder AT; Dacre J
BMC Med Educ; 2013 Jul; 13():103. PubMed ID: 23899223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
