Construct validity of script concordance testing: progression of scores from novices to experienced clinicians

To investigate the construct validity of Script Concordance Testing (SCT) scores as a measure of the clinical reasoning ability of medical students and practising General Practitioners with different levels of clinical experience. Part I involved a cross-sectional study, where 105 medical students,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:International journal of medical education 2019-09, Vol.10, p.174-179
Main Authors: Wan, Michael Siu Hong, Tor, Elina, Hudson, Judith N
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Candidates
Clinical Competence
Content Validity
Cross-Sectional Studies
Data Analysis
Educational Measurement
Emergency medical care
General Practitioners - psychology
Humans
Longitudinal Studies
Medical education
Medical students
Medicine
Original research
Pediatrics
Reproducibility of Results
Retrospective Studies
Students
Students, Medical - psychology
Thinking
Thinking Skills
Validity
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To investigate the construct validity of Script Concordance Testing (SCT) scores as a measure of the clinical reasoning ability of medical students and practising General Practitioners with different levels of clinical experience. Part I involved a cross-sectional study, where 105 medical students, 19 junior registrars and 13 experienced General Practitioners completed the same set of SCT questions, and their mean scores were compared using one-way ANOVA. In Part II, pooled and matched SCT scores for 5 cohorts of students (2012 to 2017) in Year 3 (N=584) and Year 4 (N=598) were retrospectively analysed for evidence of significant progression. A significant main effect of clinical experience was observed [F =6.215, p=0.003]. The mean SCT score for General Practitioners (M=70.39, SD=4.41, N=13) was significantly higher (p=0.011) than that of students (M = 64.90, SD = 6.30, N=105). Year 4 students (M=68.90, SD= 7.79, N=584) scored a significantly higher mean score [t =12.78, p
ISSN:2042-6372
2042-6372
DOI:10.5116/ijme.5d76.1eee