Affiliations 

  • 1 Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 381 Royal Parade, Parkville 3052, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: Angelina.lim@monash.edu
  • 2 School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, 47500 Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. Electronic address: yeap.liling@monash.edu
  • 3 College of Pharmacy, Faculty of Health, Dalhousie University, PO Box 15000, 5968 College Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada. Electronic address: Kyle.wilby@dal.ca
  • 4 Faculty of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, 381 Royal Parade, Parkville 3052, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: Vivienne.mak@monash.edu
Curr Pharm Teach Learn, 2024 Mar;16(3):212-220.
PMID: 38171979 DOI: 10.1016/j.cptl.2023.12.028

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) remain an integral part of pharmacy education. This study aimed to characterize key researchers, areas, and themes in pharmacy education OSCEs using a bibliometric review with content analysis.

METHODS: A bibliometric review was conducted on literature from over 23 years from January 2000 to May 2023. Articles focusing on any type of OSCE research in pharmacy education in both undergraduate and postgraduate sectors were included. Articles were excluded if they were not original articles or not published in English. A summative content analysis was also conducted to identify key topics.

RESULTS: A total of 192 articles were included in the analysis. There were 242 institutions that contributed to the OSCE literature in pharmacy education, with the leading country being Canada. Most OSCE research came from developed countries and were descriptive studies based on single institution data. The top themes emerging from content analysis were student perceptions on OSCE station styles (n = 98), staff perception (n = 19), grade assessment of OSCEs (n = 145), interprofessional education (n = 11), standardized patients (n = 12), and rubric development and standard setting (n = 8).

IMPLICATIONS: There has been a growth in virtual OSCEs, interprofessional OSCEs, and artificial intelligence OSCEs. Communication rubrics and minimizing assessor variability are still trending research areas. There is scope to conduct more research on evaluating specific types of OSCEs, when best to hold an OSCE, and comparing OSCEs to other assessments.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.