[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-316987-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-316987-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","a-closer-look-at-checklist-scoring-and-global-rating-for-four-osce-stations-do-the-scores-correlate-well","A Closer Look at Checklist Scoring and Global Rating for Four OSCE Stations - Do the Scores Correlate Well","","Objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) marking relies on checklist scoring and global rating as two widely used assessment systems. This study examines how checklist scores correlate with global ratings across four OSCE stations of different station types using Spearman’s rho correlations. Data from the Final Year OSCE (n=185) include detailed checklist item score sheets and examiner global rating scales, analyzed across parallel circuits and multiple rounds. Results show strong correlations overall, with communication skills highest and procedural skills lowest. The findings support joint use, with checklist preferred for procedural skills.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/a-closer-look-at-checklist-scoring-and-global-rating-for-four-osce-stations-do-the-scores-correlate-well/316987/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/a-closer-look-at-checklist-scoring-and-global-rating-for-four-osce-stations-do-the-scores-correlate-well/316987.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Aurelia","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-09-20",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",17,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What scoring systems are compared in this OSCE study?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The study compares checklist scoring and global rating used during OSCE marking.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was the correlation between checklist scores and global ratings evaluated?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients were computed for four station types, including analyses across parallel circuits and throughout multiple rounds.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What did the results show about which station correlated best?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"The communication skills station had the highest correlation, while the procedural skills station had the lowest correlation among the four stations.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},316987,1790037355,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":102,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},1099514068365,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/10000253d8d9f28188e?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1794309523707217728","| \u003Cbr>ORIGINAL ARTICLE\u003Cbr>Volume 7 Issue 2 2015 DOI: 10.5959/eimj.v7i2.341 [www.eduimed.com](www.eduimed.com) |  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| A Closer Look at Checklist Scoring and Global Rating for Four OSCE Stations: Do the Scores Correlate Well?\u003Cbr>Joong Hiong Sim1, Yang Faridah Abdul Aziz2, Anushya Vijayananthan2, Azura Mansor3, Jamuna Vadivelu1, 4, Hamimah Hassan4\u003Cbr>1Medical Education & Research Development Unit, 2Department of Biomedical Imaging, 3Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, 4Department of Medical Microbiology; Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. |  |  |\n| ARTICLE INFO\u003Cbr>Received : 14/01/2015\u003Cbr>Accepted : 13/04/2015\u003Cbr>Published : 10/06/2015\u003Cbr>KEYWORD\u003Cbr>Checklist scoring Global rating Correlations, OSCE stations | ABSTRACT\u003Cbr>Introduction: In the marking of objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), checklist scoring and global rating are two commonly used scoring systems. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine correlations between checklist scores and global ratings for four OSCE stations of different station type. Method: Data for this study was obtained from the Final Year OSCE (n=185) . Each station’s score sheet consisted of a detailed checklist of items examined. A global rating scale was also included for the examiner to indicate the global assessment for the station. Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients between checklist scores and global ratings were computed for four stations of different station type. For each station, correlations between checklist scores and global ratings were also checked across the three parallel circuits running concurrently and throughout the four rounds. Result: Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients (ρ) between checklist scores and global ratings for the four stations ranged between 0.62 to 0.88, at p\u003C0.01 . Correlation for communication skills station was the highest while correlation for procedural skills station was the lowest. For all stations, ρ ranged between 0.50 to 0.92, at p\u003C0.01 across the circuits and between 0.57 to 0.89, at p\u003C0.01 throughout the rounds. Conclusion: Checklist scores and global ratings correlated well for the station as a whole, as well as across the circuits and also throughout the rounds. Although findings of the study showed both checklist and global rating scale could be used as assessment tools in OSCE, it is suggested that for procedural skills station, checklist is preferred. |  |\n| © Medical Education Department, School of Medical Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia. All rights reserved. |  |  |\n| CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Joong Hiong Sim, Medical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Email: [simjhjp@um.edu.my](simjhjp@um.edu.my) |  |  |\n| Introduction\u003Cbr>First described by Harden and Gleeson [1], objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) has become one of the most widely used |  | assessment methods of clinical competence in medical education [2-4] . The success of OSCE is partly dependent on the method of scoring. Scoring methods for OSCEs vary widely, and they influence reliability [4] . McIlroy [5] found |\n| Education in Medicine Journal (ISSN 2180-1932) © [www.eduimed.com](www.eduimed.com | e39)[ | e39](www.eduimed.com | e39) |  |  |\n\n\n| students change behaviors depending on their perceptions of how they are being scored. However, there are still no clearly defined standards for passing an OSCE [6] .\u003Cbr>Checklists were designed and incorporated into OSCE to increase the objectivity and reliability of marking by different examiners. However, scoring against a checklist may not be as effective as it was thought to be [7] . There is abundant evidence that global rating by an experienced physician is as reliable as the standardised checklist [8, 9] . Compared to checklists, global rating scales administered by experts are a more appropriate summative measure when assessing candidates on performance","cbCaidkDtMYfCtCj","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaidkDtMYfCtCj","pdf",332310,"English","# Introduction\n# Purpose of the study\n# Method\n# Result\n# Conclusion","[{\"question\":\"What scoring systems are compared in this OSCE study?\",\"answer\":\"The study compares checklist scoring and global rating used during OSCE marking.\"},{\"question\":\"How was the correlation between checklist scores and global ratings evaluated?\",\"answer\":\"Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients were computed for four station types, including analyses across parallel circuits and throughout multiple rounds.\"},{\"question\":\"What did the results show about which station correlated best?\",\"answer\":\"The communication skills station had the highest correlation, while the procedural skills station had the lowest correlation among the four stations.\"}]","A Closer Look at Checklist Scoring and Global Rating for Four OSCE Stations - Do the Scores Correlate Well | PDF",1789927418,15]