Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Performance Assessments: A Case Study of the Objective Structured Clinical Examination

References

• Harden RM, Lilley P, Patricio M. The definitive guide to the OSCE: the Objective Structured Clinical Examination as a performance assessment. Edinburgh; New York(NY): Elsevier; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Howley LD. Performance assessment in medical education: where we’ve been and where we’re going. Eval Health Prof. 2004;27(3):285–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seelye A, Brown S, Dorociak K, et al. Functional assessment in geriatric mental health. In: Hantke N, Etkin A, O’Hara R, editors. Handbook of mental health and aging. 3rd ed. London(UK): Academic Press; 2020. p. 285–298.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan RL. Generalizability theory. New York(NY): Springer; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ, Gleser GC, Nanda H, et al. The dependability of behavioral measurements: theory of generalizability scores and profiles. New York(NY): Wiley; 1972.
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ, Rajaratnman N, Gleser GC. Theory of generalizability: a liberalization of reliability theory. Br J Stat Psychol. 1963;16(2):137–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suen HK, Ary D. Analyzing quantitative behavioral observation data. Hillsdale(NJ): Erlbaum; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Daniels VJ, Pugh D. Twelve tips for developing an OSCE that measures what you want. Med Teach. 2018;40(12):1208–1213.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houston WM, Raymond MR, Svec JC. Adjustments for rater effects in performance assessment. Appl Psychol Meas. 1991;15(4):409–421.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Shi D, Distefano C. A Short note on optimizing cost-generalizability via a machine-learning approach. Educ Psychol Meas. 2021;81(6):1221–1233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pell G, Fuller R, Homer M, et al. How to measure the quality of the OSCE: a review of metrics–AMEE guide no. 49. Med Teach. 2010;32(10):802–811.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shavelson RJ, Webb NM. Generalizability theory: a primer. Newbury Park(CA): Sage Publications; 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Brown C, Ross S, Cleland J, et al. Money makes the (medical assessment) world go round: the cost of components of a summative final year Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). Med Teach. 2015;37(7):653–659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van der Vleuten CPM. The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ. 1996;1(1):41–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gormley G. Summative OSCEs in undergraduate medical education. Ulster Med J. 2011;80(3):127–132.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sullivan GM. A primer on the validity of assessment instruments. J Grad Med Educ. 2011;3(2):119–120.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robinson R. Cost-benefit analysis. Br Med J. 1993;307(6909):924–926.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tolsgaard MG, Tabor A, Madsen ME, et al. Linking quality of care and training costs: cost-effectiveness in health professions education. Med Educ. 2015;49(12):1263–1271.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maloney S, Haines T. Issues of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness for simulation in health professions education. Adv Simul (Lond). 2016;17:1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Foo J, Rivers G, Ilic D, et al. The economic cost of failure in clinical education: a multi-perspective analysis. Med Educ. 2017;51(7):740–754.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayahangan LJ, Nielsen KR, Albrecht-Beste E, et al. Determining procedures for simulation-based training in radiology: a nationwide needs assessment. Eur Radiol. 2018;28(6):2319–2327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maloney S, Haas R, Keating JL, et al. Breakeven, cost benefit, cost effectiveness, and willingness to pay for web-based versus face-to-face education delivery for health professionals. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14(2):e47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Webb NM, Shavelson RJ, Haertel EH. 4 reliability coefficients and generalizability theory. Handb Stat. 2006;26:81–124.
   Google Scholar
• Almehrizi RS. Standard errors of variance components, measurement errors and generalizability coefficients for crossed designs. J Educ Meas. 2021;58(2):179–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boursicot K, Etheridge L, Setna Z, et al. Performance in assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa Conference. Med Teach. 2011; 33:370–383.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boursicot K, Kemp S, Wilkinson T, et al. Performance assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from the 2020 Ottawa Conference. Med Teach. 2021;43:58–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA, Brydges R, Ginsburg S, et al. A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane’s framework. Med Educ. 2015;49(6):560–575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norcini J, Anderson MB, Bollela V, et al. 2018 Consensus framework for good assessment. Med Teach. 2018;40(11):1102–1109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh K, Levin H, Jaye P, et al. Cost analyses approaches in medical education: there are no simple solutions. Med Educ. 2013;47(10):962–968.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cookson J, Crossley J, Fagan G, et al. A final clinical examination using a sequential design to improve cost-effectiveness. Med Educ. 2011;45(7):741–747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown CA, Belfield CR, Field SJ. Cost effectiveness of continuing professional development in health care: a critical review of the evidence. BMJ. 2002;324(7338):652–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kane MT. Validating the interpretations and uses of test scores. J Educ Measure. 2013;50(1):1–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AERA, APA, NCME. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington(DC): American Educational Research Association; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• DeLellis T, Maerten-Rivera JL, Zhao Y, et al. Examining validity for the pharmacy affective domain-situational judgment test (PAD-S). Am J Pharm Educ. 2022;8932. DOI:10.5688/ajpe8932
   Google Scholar