↓ Skip to main content

Clinical experience can compensate for inferior academic achievements in an undergraduate objective structured clinical examination

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, March 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Clinical experience can compensate for inferior academic achievements in an undergraduate objective structured clinical examination
Published in
BMC Medical Education, March 2023
DOI 10.1186/s12909-023-04082-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefanos A. Tsikas, Kambiz Afshar

Abstract

Practical and non-cognitive skills are essential to medical professions; yet, success in medical studies is primarily assessed with cognitive criteria. We show that practical exams can benefit students who have only average high school final grades, but working experience in medical professions. With a cross-sectional study, we compare the performance of undergraduate medical students with working experience in adjacent health-care professions (and below-average school leaving-grades) with students who entered medical school directly based on their excellent school records in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). For a sample of more than 1,200 students, we use information on OSCE scores in medical and practical skills, doctor-patient communication/interaction, performance in MC-exams, and core sociodemographic variables. Waiting list students outperformed their classmates in the demonstration of practical skills. Students admitted via their excellent school grades scored best overall. This difference vanishes once we control for school-leaving grade and age, the two main factors separating the analysed groups. Students from the waiting list have a significantly smaller overall chance to reach excellent grades in the first two years of study. Students who gathered experiences in health-care professions before enrolling at medical school can benefit from an expanded role of practical elements in medical studies. Student selection instruments should take these different starting positions and qualities of applicants into account, for example with a quota for the professionally experienced.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Student > Master 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 9 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Social Sciences 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 9 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 March 2023.
All research outputs
#13,898,915
of 23,572,442 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,784
of 3,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,772
of 361,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#33
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,572,442 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,500 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.