Development of a Script Concordance Test using an Electronic Voting System.
Abstract
This paper describes our experience using an electronic voting system (EVS) to develop a Script Concordance Test (SCT) to assess clinical reasoning in medical students. One hundred and fifteen questions were reviewed and voted on in a single two hour session by eleven specialist Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (“experts”). Questions were categorised by the level of agreement. The experts completed an evaluation questionnaire. In eighty- four (73%) questions experts were mostly or completely in agreement. In fifteen of these the modal response was that the information provided did not affect the hypothesis or proposed action. Responses were widely divergent in thirty-one (27%) questions. The experts felt that the SCT tested clinical reasoning, the EVS was an appropriate method for answering SCT questions, and that the SCT is a suitable method of assessment of medical students and resident staff. Experts felt that the SCT questions were difficult to write, that questions needed to be written avoiding regression to the mean, that absolute phrasing in the answer options was often inappropriate, and that more experience with writing questions were required. EVS is an efficient method for completing the development of SCT questions but has the disadvantage of requiring synchronous participation of experts.
Downloads
References
Bland Andrew C., Kreiter Clarence D., Gordon Joel A. (2005). The Psychometric Properties of Five Scoring Methods Applied to the Script Concordance Test. Acad Med.; 80:395–399.
Brailovsky C, Charlin B, Beausoleil S, et al., (2001). Measurement of clinical reflective capacity early in training as a predictor of clinical reasoning performance at the end of residency: an experimental study on the script concordance test. Medical Education;35:430-436
Charlin, Bernard, Brailovsky Carlos, Roy Louise et al., (2000) The Script Concordance Test: A Tool to Assess the Reflective Clinician. Teach Learn Med; 12(4), 189-195
Charlin Bernard, Gagnon Robert, Pelletier Jean, et al., (2006) Assessment of clinical reasoning in the context of uncertainty: the effect of variability within the reference panel. Medical Education; 40: 848–854 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02541.x
Duggan Paul, Palmer Edward, Devitt Peter (2007). Electronic voting to encourage interactive lectures: a randomised trial. BMC Medical Education; 7:25 doi:10.1186/1472- 6920-7-25
Gagnon R, CharlinB, Coletti M, et al., (2005). Assessment in the context of uncertainty: how many members are needed on the panel of reference of a script concordance test? Medical Education; 39: 284–291 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02092.x
Meterissian, Sarkis H (2006). A Novel Method of Assessing Clinical Reasoning in Surgical Residents Surg Innov; 13; 115 DOI: 10.1177/1553350606291042
Meterissian Sarkis, Zabolotny Brent, Gagnon Robert, Charlin Bernard (2007). Is the script concordance test a valid instrument for assessment of intraoperative decision-making skills? The American Journal of Surgery 193 248–251
Sibert Louis, Darmoni Stefan J, Dahamna Badisse, et al., (2005). Online clinical reasoning assessment with the Script Concordance test: a feasibility study. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 5:18 doi:10.1186/1472-6947-5-18
Sibert Louis, Darmoni Stefan J, Dahamna Badisse, et al., (2006).On line clinical reasoning assessment with Script Concordance test in urology: results of a French pilot study. BMC Medical Education, 6:45 doi:10.1186/1472-6920-6-45.