Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations
Background: This pilot study compared performance of University of Calgary students on internal clerkship examinations with corresponding National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examinations. Methods: Between April and October 2007, students completed internal and NBME subject examinatio...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Canadian Medical Education Journal
2011-11-01
|
Series: | Canadian Medical Education Journal |
Online Access: | https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cmej/article/view/36560 |
id |
doaj-c170e11398174c58ad6de35d026d0677 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-c170e11398174c58ad6de35d026d06772020-11-24T22:30:02ZengCanadian Medical Education JournalCanadian Medical Education Journal1923-12022011-11-0122e81e8123707Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject ExaminationsPamela Veale0Wayne WoloschukSylvain CoderreKevin McLaughlinBruce WrightUniversity of CalgaryBackground: This pilot study compared performance of University of Calgary students on internal clerkship examinations with corresponding National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examinations. Methods: Between April and October 2007, students completed internal and NBME subject examinations following six mandatory rotations. Local faculty within each discipline set the minimum performance level (MPL) for internal examinations. Two methods of standard setting were considered for NBME exams and a sensitivity analysis was performed. Corresponding internal and NBME examination scores were compared using McNemar’s discordant pair analysis. Results: A significant and unexpected difference in failure rate between internal and external examinations was found in all clerkships. 1.4% of students were below the MPL for internal examinations and 27.3% (modified Angoff) or 25.9% (mean Hofstee compromise) (p<0.0001 for both) for the NBME. The proportion of students below MPL for internal examinations was also below the lower limit of the Hofstee compromise (14.4%). Conclusion: Possible explanations include leniency bias in internal standard setting, discrepant content validity between local curriculum and NBME examinations, difference in student perception of examinations, and performance bias due to unfamiliar units.https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cmej/article/view/36560 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Pamela Veale Wayne Woloschuk Sylvain Coderre Kevin McLaughlin Bruce Wright |
spellingShingle |
Pamela Veale Wayne Woloschuk Sylvain Coderre Kevin McLaughlin Bruce Wright Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations Canadian Medical Education Journal |
author_facet |
Pamela Veale Wayne Woloschuk Sylvain Coderre Kevin McLaughlin Bruce Wright |
author_sort |
Pamela Veale |
title |
Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations |
title_short |
Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations |
title_full |
Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations |
title_fullStr |
Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparison of Student Performance on Internally Prepared Clerkship Examinations and NBME Subject Examinations |
title_sort |
comparison of student performance on internally prepared clerkship examinations and nbme subject examinations |
publisher |
Canadian Medical Education Journal |
series |
Canadian Medical Education Journal |
issn |
1923-1202 |
publishDate |
2011-11-01 |
description |
Background: This pilot study compared performance of University of Calgary students on internal clerkship examinations with corresponding National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) subject examinations.
Methods: Between April and October 2007, students completed internal and NBME subject examinations following six mandatory rotations. Local faculty within each discipline set the minimum performance level (MPL) for internal examinations. Two methods of standard setting were considered for NBME exams and a sensitivity analysis was performed. Corresponding internal and NBME examination scores were compared using McNemar’s discordant pair analysis.
Results: A significant and unexpected difference in failure rate between internal and external examinations was found in all clerkships. 1.4% of students were below the MPL for internal examinations and 27.3% (modified Angoff) or 25.9% (mean Hofstee compromise) (p<0.0001 for both) for the NBME. The proportion of students below MPL for internal examinations was also below the lower limit of the Hofstee compromise (14.4%).
Conclusion: Possible explanations include leniency bias in internal standard setting, discrepant content validity between local curriculum and NBME examinations, difference in student perception of examinations, and performance bias due to unfamiliar units. |
url |
https://journalhosting.ucalgary.ca/index.php/cmej/article/view/36560 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT pamelaveale comparisonofstudentperformanceoninternallypreparedclerkshipexaminationsandnbmesubjectexaminations AT waynewoloschuk comparisonofstudentperformanceoninternallypreparedclerkshipexaminationsandnbmesubjectexaminations AT sylvaincoderre comparisonofstudentperformanceoninternallypreparedclerkshipexaminationsandnbmesubjectexaminations AT kevinmclaughlin comparisonofstudentperformanceoninternallypreparedclerkshipexaminationsandnbmesubjectexaminations AT brucewright comparisonofstudentperformanceoninternallypreparedclerkshipexaminationsandnbmesubjectexaminations |
_version_ |
1725742139687567360 |