METHODS: This critique on the OSCE is based on the published findings of researchers from its inception in 1975 to 2004.
RESULTS: The reliability, validity, objectivity and practicability or feasibility of this examination are based on the number of stations, construction of stations, method of scoring (checklists and/ or global scoring) and number of students assessed. For a comprehensive assessment of clinical competence, other methods should be used in conjunction with the OSCE.
CONCLUSION: The OSCE can be a reasonably reliable, valid and objective method of assessment, but its main drawback is that it is resource-intensive.
METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted via a validated 49-item questionnaire, administered immediately after all students completed the examination. The questionnaire comprised of questions to evaluate the content and structure of the examination, perception of OSCE validity and reliability, and rating of OSCE in relation to other assessment methods. Open-ended follow-up questions were included to generate qualitative data.
RESULTS: Over 80% of the students found the OSCE to be helpful in highlighting areas of weaknesses in their clinical competencies. Seventy-eight percent agreed that it was comprehensive and 66% believed it was fair. About 46% felt that the 15 minutes allocated per station was inadequate. Most importantly, about half of the students raised concerns that personality, ethnicity, and/or gender, as well as interpatient and inter-assessor variability were potential sources of bias that could affect their scores. However, an overwhelming proportion of the students (90%) agreed that the OSCE provided a useful and practical learning experience.
CONCLUSIONS: Students' perceptions and acceptance of the new method of assessment were positive. The survey further highlighted for future refinement the strengths and weaknesses associated with the development and implementation of an OSCE in the International Islamic University Malaysia's pharmacy curriculum.