What is being assessed in the MRCGP oral examination? A qualitative study

British Journal of General Practice

Volumn 55, Issue 515, 2005, Pages 430-436

  Simpson, Robin G ^a   Ballard, Karen D ^b  

^a Clinical Services   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Decision making; MRCGP oral examination; Reliability and validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; COMPETENCE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL PROFESSION; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; QUALITY CONTROL; VALIDATION PROCESS;

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DECISION MAKING; EDUCATION, MEDICAL, GRADUATE; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; FAMILY PRACTICE; GREAT BRITAIN; SOCIAL VALUES;

EID: 20344389023     PISSN: 09601643     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Siker ES. A measure of competence. The first Mushin lecture. Anaesthesia 1976; 31: 732-742.
2. Fowell SL, Maudsley G, Maguire P, et al. Student assessment in undergraduate medical education in the United Kingdom. Med Educ 2000; 34(suppl 1): 1-49.
3. NHS Website. Modernising Medical Careers. http://www.mmc.nhs.uk/assessment.asp?m=4 (accessed 20 Feb 2005).
4. Southgate L, Cox J, David T, Hatch D, et al. The General Medical Council's Performance Procedures; peer review of performance in the workplace. Med Educ 2001; 35(suppl 1): 9-19.
5. Kearney RA, Puchalski SA, Yang HY, Skakun EN. The inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of new Canadian oral examination format in anesthesia is fair to good. Can J Anaesth 2002; 49(3): 232-236.
6. Schubert A, Tetzlaff JE, Tan M, Rychman JV, Mascha E. Consistency, inter-rater reliability, and validity of 441 consecutive mock oral examinations in anaesthesiology. Anaesthesiology, 1999; 91: 288-298.
7. Weingarten MA, Polliack MR, Tabenkin, H, Kahan E. Variations among examiners in family medicine residency board oral examinations. Med Educ 2000; 34(1): 13-17.
8. Evans LR, Ingersol RW, Smith EJ. The reliability validity and taxonomic structure of the oral examination. J Med Educ 1966; 41: 651-657.
9. Rowland-Morin PA, Burchard KW, Garb JL, Coe NPW. Influence of effective communication by surgery students on their oral examination scores. Acad Med 1991; 66: 169-171.
10. Jayawickramarajah PT. Oral examinations in medical education. Med Educ 1985; 19: 290-293.
11. Daelmans HE, Scherpbier AJ, van der Vleuten CP, Donker AJ. Reliability of clinical oral examinations re-examined. Med Teach 2001; 23(4): 422-424.
12. Olson LG, Coughlan I, Rolfe I, Hensley MJ. The effect of a structured question grid on the validity and perceived fairness of a medical long case assessment. Med Educ 2000; 23(4): 46-52.
13. Ryding HA, Murphy HJ. Employing oral examinations (viva voce) in assessing dental students clinical reasoning skills. J Dent Educ 1999; 63(9): 682-687.
14. Rangachari PK. The targeted oral. Adv Physiol Educ 2004; 28: 213-214.
15. Royal College of General Practitioners. MRCGP Examination Regulations for 2005. http://www.rcgp.org.uk/exam/regulations/2005/regu11.asp (accessed 20 Feb 2005).
16. Garvin DA, Roberto MA. What you don't know about making decisions. Harv Bus Rev 2001; 79(8): 108-116, 61
17. Charan R. Conquering a culture of indecision. Harv Bus Rev 2001; 79(4): 75-82, 168.
18. Hammond JS, Keeney RL, Raiffa H. The hidden traps in decision making. Clin Lab Manage Rev 1999; 13(1): 3947.
19. Collins Concise Dictionary and Thesaurus (2nd edn). Glasgow: Collins, 1995; 231
20. Wass V, Wakeford R, Neighbour R, van der Vleuten C. Achieving acceptable reliability in oral examinations: an analysis of the Royal College of General Practitioners membership examination's oral component. Med Educ 2003; 37(2): 126-131.
21. Wakeford R, Southgate L, Wass V. Improving oral examinations: selecting, training and monitoring examiners for the MRCGP. BMJ 1995; 311: 931-935.
22. Hutchinson L, Aitken P, Hayes T. Are medical postgraduate certification processes valid? A systematic review of published evidence. Med Educ 2002; 36(1): 73-91.
23. Martin IG, Jolly B. Piedictive validity and estimated cut score of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) used as an assessment of clinical skills at the end of the first clinical year. Med Educ 2002; 36(5): 418-425.
24. Townsend AH, Mcllvenny S, Miller CJ, Dunn EV. The use of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) for formative and summative assessment in a general practice clinical attachment and its relationship to final medical school examination performance. Med Educ 2001; 35(9): 841-846.
25. Hodges B, McNaughton N, Regehr G, et at. The challenge of creating new OSCE measures to capture the characteristics of expertise. Med Educ 2002; 360: 742-748.
26. Mavis BE, Henry RC. Between a rock and a hard place: finding a place for the OSCE in medical education. Med Educ 2002; 36(5): 408-409.