What works best in a general practice specific OSCE for medical students: Mini-CEX or content-related checklists?

References

• Barrows HS. 1993. An overview of the uses of standardized patients for teaching and evaluating clinical skills. AAMC. Acad Med. 68(6):443–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biggs J. 2003. Aligning teaching and assessing to course objectives. Conference on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: New Trens and Innovations. University of Aveiro, Apr 13–17.
   Google Scholar
• Billings J, Stoeckle J. 1999. The clinical encounter. A guide to the medical interview and case presentation. 2 ed. St. Louis: Mosby Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brannick MT, Erol-Korkmaz HT, Prewett M. 2011. A systematic review of the reliability of objective structured clinical examination scores. Med Educ. 45(12):1181–1189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buddeberg-Fischer B, Stamm M, Buddeberg C, Klaghofer R. 2008. The new generation of family physicians-career motivation, life goals and work-life balance. Swiss Med Wkly. 138(21–22):305–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buddeberg-Fischer B, Stamm M, Marty F. 2007. Family medicine in Switzerland: training experiences in medical school and residency. Fam Med. 39(9):651–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen D, Colliver J, Marcy M, Fried E, Swartz M. 1996. Psychometric properties of a standardized patient checklist and rating-scale form used to assess interpersonal and communication skills. Acad Med. 71(1):89–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook D, Dupras D, Beckman T, Thomas K, Pankratz V. 2009. Effect of rater training on reliability and accuracy of mini-CEX scores: a randomized, controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med. 24(1):74–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cunnington J, Neville A, Norman G. 1996. the risks of thoroughness: reliability and validity of global ratings and checklists in an OSCE. Adv Health Sci Educ. 1(3):227–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DEGAM e.V. 2013. Musterlogbuch für das Praktische Jahr Allgemeinmedizin. Frankfurt am Main: DEGAM e.V. [accessed 2019 Jan 9]. https://www.degam.de/files/Inhalte/Degam-Inhalte/Sektionen_und_Arbeitsgruppen/Sektion_StudiumHochschule/Muster_PJ-Logbuch_3.1.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Downing SM. 2004. Reliability: on the reproducibility of assessment data. Med Educ. 38(9):1006–1012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duerson M, Romrell L, Stevens C. 2000. Impacting faculty teaching and student performance: nine years’ experience with the Objective Structured Clinical Examination. Teach Learn Med. 12(4):176–182.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gensichen J, Gerlach F. 2003. Allgemeinmedizinische Lehre – Herausforderungen der neuen Approbationsordnung. Zeitschrift Für Allgemeinmedizin. 79:405–407.
   Google Scholar
• Gulich M. 2005. Praktisches Jahr in der Allgemeinmedizin – eine neue Herausforderung. Z Allg Med. 81(1):9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Hasler L, Stamm M, Buddeberg-Fischer B. 2008. Future family physicians – reasons for their specialty choice and crucial professional skills. Praxis. 97(24):1277–1285.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hodges B, Hanson M, McNaughton N, Regehr G. 2002. Creating, monitoring, and improving a psychiatry OSCE. Acad Psychiatry. 26(3):134–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphrey-Murto S, Cote M, Pugh D, Wood TJ. 2018. Assessing the validity of a multidisciplinary mini-clinical evaluation exercise. Teach Learn Med. 30(2):152–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ilgen J, Ma I, Hatala R, Cook D. 2015. A systematic review of validity evidence for checklists versus global rating scales in simulation-based assessment. Med Educ. 49(2):161–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kopetsch T. 2010. Dem deutschen Gesundheitswesen gehen die Ärzte aus! Studie zur Altersstruktur- und Arztzahlentwicklung. 5 ed. Berlin: Bundesärztekammer und Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan P, Cleave-Hogg D, Guest C. 2001. A comparison of global ratings and checklist scores from an undergraduate assessment using an anesthesia simulator. Acad Med. 76(10):1053–1055.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norcini JJ, Blank LL, Duffy FD, Fortna GS. 2003. The Mini-CEX: a method for assessing clinical skills. Ann Intern Med. 138(6):476–481.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norcini J, Burch V. 2007. Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31. Med Teach. 29(9–10):855–871.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters H, Holzhausen Y, Boscardin C, Ten Cate O, Chen H. 2017. Twelve tips for the implementation of EPAs for assessment and entrustment decisions. Med Teach. 39(8):802–807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regehr G, Freeman R, Robb A, Missiha N, Heisey R. 1999. OSCE performance evaluations made by standardized patients: comparing checklist and global rating scores. Acad Med. 74(10):135–137.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringsted C, Ostergaard D, Ravn L, Pedersen J, Berlac P, van der Vleuten C. 2003. A feasibility study comparing checklists and global rating forms to assess resident performance in clinical skills. Med Teach. 25(6):654–658.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheffer S, Muehlinghaus I, Froehmel A, Ortwein H. 2008. Assessing students’ communication skills: validation of a global rating. Adv Health Sci Educ. 13(5):583–592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swayamprakasam A, Segaran A, Allery L. 2014. Work-based assessments: making the transition from participation to engagement. JRSM Open. 5(3):204253331351586.
   Google Scholar
• Ten Cate O. 2017. Entrustment decisions: bringing the patient into the assessment equation. Acad Med. 92(6):736–738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ten Cate O, Graafmans L, Posthumus I, Welink L, van Dijk M. 2018. The EPA-based Utrecht undergraduate clinical curriculum: development and implementation. Med Teach. 40(5):506–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Townsend A, Mcllvenny S, Miller C, Dunn E. 2001. The use of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for formative and summative assessment in a general practice clinical attachment and its relationship to final medical school examination performance. Med Educ. 35(9):841–846.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner J, Dankoski M. 2008. Objective structured clinical exams: a critical review. Fam Med. 40(8):574–578.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Vleuten C. 1996. The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1(1):41–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker H. 2006. Primary care is dying in the United States: mutatis mutandis. Med Educ. 40(1):9–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whitcomb M, Cohen J. 2004. The future of primary care medicine. N Engl J Med. 351(7):710–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkinson T, Frampton C, Thompson-Fawcett M, Egan T. 2003. Objectivity in objective structured clinical examinations: checklists are no substitute for examiner commitment. Acad Med. 78(2):219–223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams R, McLaughlin M, Eulenberg B, Hurm M, Nendaz M. 1999. The patient findings questionnaire: one solution to an important standardized patient examination problem. Acad Med. 74(10):1118–1124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar