[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-317307-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":85,"doc-detail-317307-en":134},{"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":78,"head_meta":80,"extra_data":82,"updated_unix":84},105,"en","examiner-characteristics-and-interrater-reliability-in-a-communication-osce","Examiner characteristics and interrater reliability in a communication OSCE","","Objective: identify inter-individual examiner factors linked to interrater reliability in a summative communication OSCE during the 4th study year. Methods: a 4-station OSCE used a 4-item 5-point global rating instrument; interrater reliability was examined via secondary bivariate analysis across examiner factors (gender, profession, OSCE experience, and examiner training) with intraclass correlation coefficients. Results: reliability was higher for same-gender dyads and for dyads with two clinicians versus non-clinical/mixed professions, and for high versus low/mixed OSCE experience. Recent training showed no influence.",{"@graph":14,"@context":77},[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/examiner-characteristics-and-interrater-reliability-in-a-communication-osce/317307/",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/examiner-characteristics-and-interrater-reliability-in-a-communication-osce/317307.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"McQueen","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-22","2026-09-20",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",7,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69,73],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What was the study objective regarding interrater reliability?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"To identify examiner-related factors associated with interrater reliability in a summative communication OSCE in the 4th study year.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were examiner factors evaluated in the OSCE assessment?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The study analyzed interrater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients across examiner factors including gender, profession, OSCE experience, and examiner training.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Which examiner characteristics were associated with higher interrater reliability?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Interrater reliability was higher for dyads with the same gender, for dyads with two clinicians compared with non-clinical/mixed professions, and for dyads with high versus low/mixed OSCE experience.",{"name":74,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":75},"Did recent examiner training affect interrater reliability?",{"text":76,"@type":64},"No. Participation in recent examiner training had no influence on the intraclass correlation coefficients.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":79,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":81,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":83,"site_id":7},317307,1790079147,{"code":4,"msg":86,"data":87},"success",[88,92,96,100,105,110,114,118,123,126,130],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":111,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":116,"slug":117},8,30,"research-report",{"id":119,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":121,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":125},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":127,"slug":129},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":131,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":132,"show_sort_weight":101,"slug":133},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":86,"data":135},{"doc_id":83,"user_id":136,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":115,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":101,"language":143,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":144,"faqs":145,"seo_title":146,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":147,"read_time":148,"preview_page_count":4},5909890329169,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","Patient Education and Counseling 100 (2017) 1230–1234  \nContents lists available at ScienceDirect  \nPatient Education and Counseling  \njournal [homepage:](homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/pateducou)[ www. elsevier. com/locate/pateducou](homepage: www. elsevier. com/locate/pateducou)  \n| Short communication\u003Cbr>Examiner characteristics and interrater reliability in a communication OSCE\u003Cbr>Achim Mortsiefera , * , André Kargerb, Thomas Rotthoffc, Bianca Raskid, Michael Pentzeka\u003Cbr>a Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty, Institute of General Practice, Werdener Str. 7, 40227 Düsseldorf, Germany\u003Cbr>b Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty, Clinical Institute of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Moorenstr. 5, 40225, Düsseldorf, Germany,\u003Cbr>c Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty, Deanery of Study and Department for Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Rheumatology, Moorenstr. 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany\u003Cbr>d Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty, Deanery of Study and Clinical Institute of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Moorenstr. 5, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany |  | |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| A R T I C L E I N F O | A B S T R A C T\u003Cbr>Objective: To identify inter-individual examiner factors associated with interrater reliability in a summative communication OSCE in the 4th study year.\u003Cbr>Methods: The OSCE consists of 4 stations assessed with a 4-item 5-point global rating instrument. Abivariate secondary analysis of interrater reliability in relation to 4 examiner factors (gender, profession, OSCE experience, examiner training) was conducted. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated and compared between examiner dyads of different similarity.\u003Cbr>Results: 169 pairwise ratings from 19 different examiners in 16 dyads were analysed. Interrater reliability is significantly higher in examiner dyads of same vs. different gender (ICC=0.76 (95%CI=0.65-0.83) vs. ICC =0.41 (95%CI=0.21-0.57)), in dyads of two clinicians vs. non-clinical/mixed professions (ICC=0.72 (95%CI=0.56-0.83) vs. ICC =0.57 (95%CI=0.41-0.69)), and in dyads with high vs. low/mixed OSCE experience (ICC=0.73 (95%CI 0.50-0.87) vs. ICC =0.56 (95%CI=0.41-0.69)). Participation in recent examiner training had no influence on ICCs.\u003Cbr>Conclusion: Better concordance of ratings between clinically active examiners might be a hint for contextspecificity of good communication. Higher interrater reliability between examiners with same gender may indicate gender-specific communication concepts.\u003Cbr>Practice implications: Medical faculties introducing summative assessment of communication competence should focus the influence of examiner characteristics on interrater reliability.\u003Cbr>© 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. |  |\n| Article history:\u003Cbr>Received 20 September 2016\u003Cbr>Received in revised form 18 January 2017 Accepted 21 January 2017 |  |  |\n| Keywords:\u003Cbr>Communication competence Assessment\u003Cbr>Examiner factors\u003Cbr>OSCE |  |  |\n\n1. Introduction  \nThe “objective structured clinical examination” (OSCE) is a well-established method of assessing a student's clinical skills, including communicative competence [1–4]. The reliability of an OSCE is influenced by various factors [5–7]. However, some authors suggest that even in a well-designed and valid OSCE, examiner factors remain the most important contributors to overall examination error [8,9].  \n* Corresponding author.  \nE-mail [addresses:](addresses: Andre.Karger@med.uni-duesseldorf.de)[ Andre.Karger@med.uni-duesseldorf.de](addresses: Andre.Karger@med.uni-duesseldorf.de) (A. Karger), [Rotthoff@med.uni-duesseldorf.de](Rotthoff@med.uni-duesseldorf.de) (T. Rotthoff), [Bianca.Raski@med.uni-duesseldorf.de](Bianca.Raski@med.uni-duesseldorf.de) (B. Raski), [Pentzek@med.uni-duesseldorf.de](Pentzek@med.uni-duesseldorf.de)[ ](Pentzek@med.uni-duesseldorf.de)(M. Pentzek).  \n[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.01.013](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.01.013)  ","cbCaijgeIqLSeYKD","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijgeIqLSeYKD","pdf",382970,"English","# Objective\n# Methods\n# Results\n# Conclusion\n# Practice implications\n# Article history and keywords\n# Introduction\n# Methods","[{\"question\":\"What was the study objective regarding interrater reliability?\",\"answer\":\"To identify examiner-related factors associated with interrater reliability in a summative communication OSCE in the 4th study year.\"},{\"question\":\"How were examiner factors evaluated in the OSCE assessment?\",\"answer\":\"The study analyzed interrater reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients across examiner factors including gender, profession, OSCE experience, and examiner training.\"},{\"question\":\"Which examiner characteristics were associated with higher interrater reliability?\",\"answer\":\"Interrater reliability was higher for dyads with the same gender, for dyads with two clinicians compared with non-clinical/mixed professions, and for dyads with high versus low/mixed OSCE experience.\"},{\"question\":\"Did recent examiner training affect interrater reliability?\",\"answer\":\"No. Participation in recent examiner training had no influence on the intraclass correlation coefficients.\"}]","Examiner characteristics and interrater reliability in a communication OSCE | PDF",1789931471,13]