Previously submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research (no longer under consideration since Aug 21, 2019)
Date Submitted: Aug 13, 2019
Open Peer Review Period: Aug 9, 2019 - Aug 21, 2019
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Student and Tutor Satisfaction with an Online and Paper-based Clinical Assessment Tool.
ABSTRACT
Background:
Assessment of students’ clinical competence in healthcare education typically involves the evaluation of their performance during a patient consultation. Direct observation of students with actual patients is important for the assessment of clinical skills prior to professional registration. The mini-clinical evaluation exercise (mini-CEX) has been widely established as part of a broad clinical assessment profile. The paper form has previously been validated in a number of healthcare scenarios including pre-registration osteopathic practice. Differences in satisfaction, when deploying the instrument through different media, are not widely explored.
Objective:
This study explored osteopathy students’ and tutors’ rating of satisfaction using the mini-CEX when administered via online and paper-based media. This was with a view to answer the following research question: Does the method of capture influence assessment satisfaction scores in the use of the mini-CEX?
Methods:
An online mini-CEX was developed using Google Forms and was initially trialled as a data entry process, with administration staff keying-in the completed paper assessment details post-hoc. Subsequently, Android-based tablets were used for direct capture of the observed clinical practice evaluation of students by tutors. This facilitated a comparison to the paper counterpart over the course of three academic years. The influence of gender and methods of assessment capture (paper and online) was explored with binary regression, Spearman's correlation and Kruskal Wallis test, with dependent variables of student and tutor satisfaction.
Results:
A total of 736 mini-CEX assessments of patient encounters were analysed, and 550 (75%) were completed online. The influence of the paper capture of assessment on satisfaction scores, compared to the online process, was not significant (odds ratio 1, CI 0.86 – 1.15). Student satisfaction ratings for female students assessed by male tutors indicated lower summary scores compared to same-sex pairings (P<.007). Correlation between all student and tutor satisfaction ratings was moderate (r2=0.62, 95% CI 0.57 – 0.66, P<.00001).
Conclusions:
The findings suggest that there is no statistically significant difference between the two methods of delivery in terms of satisfaction of use for either examiner or student, potentially indicative of the suitability of the online version. While this has relevance to the teaching environment within osteopathy, there is applicability to other clinical healthcare. The role of gender as an influence in the satisfactory conduct of assessment warrants further investigation Clinical Trial: N/A
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.