Pinilla, Severin; Lerch, Seraina; Lüdi, Raphaela; Neubauer, Florian; Feller, Sabine; Stricker, Daniel; Berendonk, Christoph; Huwendiek, Sören (2023). Entrustment versus performance scale in high-stakes OSCEs: Rater insights and psychometric properties. Medical teacher, 45(8), pp. 885-892. Taylor & Francis 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2187683
Text
Entrustment_versus_performance_scale_in_high_stakes_OSCEs_Rater_insights_and_psychometric_properties.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (1MB) |
BACKGROUND
Although entrustment scales are increasingly applied in workplace-based assessments, their role in OSCEs remains unclear. We investigated raters' perceptions using an entrustment scale and psychometric analyses.
METHOD
A mixed-methods design was used. OSCE raters' (n = 162) perceptions were explored via questionnaire and four focus groups (n = 14). Psychometric OSCE properties were analyzed statistically.
RESULTS
Raters (n = 53, response rate = 41%) considered the entrustment scale comprehensible (89%) and applicable (60%). A total of 43% preferred the entrustment scale, 21% preferred the global performance scale, and 36% were undecided. Raters' written comments indicated that while they appreciated the authenticity of entrustment levels, they considered them subjective. The focus groups highlighted three main themes: (1) recollections of the clinical workplace as a cognitive reference triggered by entrustment scales; (2) factors influencing entrustment decisions; and (3) cognitive load is reduced at the perceived cost of objectivity. Psychometric analyses (n = 480 students) revealed improvements in some OSCE metrics when entrustment and global performance scales were combined.
CONCLUSION
Entrustment scales are beneficial for high-stakes OSCEs and have greater clinical relevance from the raters' perspective. Our findings support the use of entrustment and global performance scales in combination.