[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-440133-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-440133-en":130},{"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","leveraging-feedback-mechanisms-to-improve-the-quality-of-objective-structured-clinical-examinations-in-singapore-an-exploratory-action-research-study","Leveraging feedback mechanisms to improve the quality of objective structured clinical examinations in Singapore - an exploratory action research study","","Examiner scoring variability threatens the fairness and reliability of objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). This exploratory action research study investigated the feasibility and perceived value of a structured, psychometric-informed, individualized feedback mechanism for OSCE examiners. Across two exploratory cycles (Nov 2023–Jun 2024), individualized feedback reports were co-designed, refined through iterative action, and evaluated using interviews, thematic analysis, reflective logs, and field notes.",{"@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/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/leveraging-feedback-mechanisms-to-improve-the-quality-of-objective-structured-clinical-examinations-in-singapore-an-exploratory-action-research-study/440133/",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/leveraging-feedback-mechanisms-to-improve-the-quality-of-objective-structured-clinical-examinations-in-singapore-an-exploratory-action-research-study/440133.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Blitz","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-22","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",9,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"Why focus on feedback mechanisms in OSCEs?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Examiner scoring variability undermines fairness and reliability in OSCEs, and existing training lacks psychometric-informed individualized feedback for examiners.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How was the feedback mechanism developed and refined?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Two exploratory cycles (Nov 2023–Jun 2024) were conducted, using psychometric analyses to inform individualized reports, followed by iterative refinements based on examiner interviews and responses.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What changes did examiners report after using the feedback reports?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Examiners reported difficulties interpreting complex terminology early on, leading to refinements such as glossaries and visual graphs; later, they showed greater confidence, requested longitudinal reporting, and shifted toward reflective engagement.","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},440133,1791130120,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,95,100,105,110,115,119,122,126],{"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":29,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":111,"language":139,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":143,"read_time":117},24464137899374,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_3d24733baf745e90a7e4bdd5f77d97b2","eISSN: 1975-5937 Open Access  \n Research article   \nJ Educ Eval Health Prof 2025;22:28 •  \n[https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2025.22.28](https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2025.22.28)  \nJournal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions  \nLeveraging feedback mechanisms to improve the quality of objective structured clinical examinationsin Singapore: an exploratory action research study  \nHan Ting Jillian Yeo1*, DujeepaDasharatha Samarasekera1, Michael Dean2  \n1Centre for Medical Education (CenMED), Yong LooLin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore 2Graduate School of Education, College of Professional Studies, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA  \nPurpose: Variability in examiner scoring threatens the fairness and reliability of objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). While examiner standardization exists, there is currently no structured, psychometric-informed, individualized feedback mechanism for examiners. This study explored the feasibility and perceived value of such a mechanism using an action research approach to co-design and iterativelyrefine examiner feedback reports.  \nMethods: Two exploratory cycles were conducted between November 2023 and June 2024 with phase 4 OSCE examiners atthe Yong LooLin School of Medicine. In cycle 1, psychometric analyses of examiner scoring for a phase 4 OSCE informed the design of individualized reports, which were evaluated through interviews. Revisions were made to the format of thereport and implemented in cycle 2, where examiner responses were again collected. Data were analyzed thematically, supported by reflective logs and field notes.  \nResults: Nine examiners participated in cycle 1 and 7 in cycle 2. In cycle 1, examiners highlighted challenges in interpreting complex terminology, leading toreport refinements such as glossaries and visual graphs. In cycle 2, examiners demonstrated greater confidence in applying feedback, requested longitudinal reports, and shifted from initial resistance to reflective engagement. Across cycles, the reports improved credibility, neutrality, and examiner self-regulation. Conclusion: This exploratory study suggests that psychometric-informed feedback reports can facilitate examiner reflection and transparency in OSCEs. While the findings highlight feasibility and examiner acceptance, longitudinal delivery of feedback, collection of quantitative outcome data, and larger samples are needed to establish whether such reports improve scoring consistency and assessment fairness.  \nKeywords: Psychological feedback; Educational measurement; Objective structured clinical examination; Qualitative research; Singapore  \nLeveraging feedback mechanisms to improve the quality of objective structured clinical examinations in Singapore:  \nan exploratory action research study  \n*Corresponding email: [jillyeo@nus.edu.sg](jillyeo@nus.edu.sg)  \n| \u003Cbr>Method\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>\u003Cbr>|\n| --- |\n|  |\n\nResult  \nRefinements  \nClarifying  \nunfamiliar jargon  \nImpact  \nEditor: A Ra Cho, The Catholic University of Korea, Korea  \nReceived: August 6, 2025  \nAccepted: September 12, 2025  \nPublished: September 30, 2025 This article is available from:  \n[http://jeehp.org](http://jeehp.org)  \n2025 Korea Health Personnel Licensing Examination Institute  \n This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.  \n[www.jeehp.org](www.jeehp.org) (page number not for citation purposes) 1  \nJ Educ Eval Health Prof 2025;22:28 • [https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2025.22.28](https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2025.22.28)  \nIntroduction  \nBackground  \nClinical skills are fundamental to a clinician’s core duties [ 1]. Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) were introduced to assess clinical competence, aiming to standardize and reduce variation in clinical assessments [2]. However, examiner scor","cbCaijIzBMjWJrxs","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaijIzBMjWJrxs","pdf",980544,"English","# Introduction\n## Background\n# Objectives\n# Methods\n## Ethics statement\n## Personal characteristics of research team\n# Results\n## Refinements\n# Conclusion","[{\"question\":\"Why focus on feedback mechanisms in OSCEs?\",\"answer\":\"Examiner scoring variability undermines fairness and reliability in OSCEs, and existing training lacks psychometric-informed individualized feedback for examiners.\"},{\"question\":\"How was the feedback mechanism developed and refined?\",\"answer\":\"Two exploratory cycles (Nov 2023–Jun 2024) were conducted, using psychometric analyses to inform individualized reports, followed by iterative refinements based on examiner interviews and responses.\"},{\"question\":\"What changes did examiners report after using the feedback reports?\",\"answer\":\"Examiners reported difficulties interpreting complex terminology early on, leading to refinements such as glossaries and visual graphs; later, they showed greater confidence, requested longitudinal reporting, and shifted toward reflective engagement.\"}]","Leveraging feedback mechanisms to improve the quality of objective structured clinical examinations in Singapore - an exploratory action research study | PDF",1790691259]