How well do second-year students learn physical diagnosis? Observational study of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)
Background
Little is known about using the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in physical diagnosis courses. The purpose of this study was to describe student performance on an OSCE in a physical diagnosis course.
Methods
Cross-sectional study at Harvard Medical School, 1997–1999, for 489 second-year students.
Results
Average total OSCE score was 57% (range 39–75%). Among clinical skills, students scored highest on patient interaction (72%), followed by examination technique (65%), abnormality identification (62%), history-taking (60%), patient presentation (60%), physical examination knowledge (47%), and differential diagnosis (40%) (p < .0001). Among 16 OSCE stations, scores ranged from 70% for arthritis to 29% for calf pain (p < .0001). Teaching sites accounted for larger adjusted differences in station scores, up to 28%, than in skill scores (9%) (p < .0001).
Conclusions
Students scored higher on interpersonal and technical skills than on interpretive or integrative skills. Station scores identified specific content that needs improved teaching.
Complete Metadata
| @type | dcat:Dataset |
|---|---|
| accessLevel | public |
| bureauCode |
[
"009:25"
]
|
| contactPoint |
{
"fn": "NIH",
"@type": "vcard:Contact",
"hasEmail": "mailto:info@nih.gov"
}
|
| description | Background Little is known about using the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) in physical diagnosis courses. The purpose of this study was to describe student performance on an OSCE in a physical diagnosis course. Methods Cross-sectional study at Harvard Medical School, 1997–1999, for 489 second-year students. Results Average total OSCE score was 57% (range 39–75%). Among clinical skills, students scored highest on patient interaction (72%), followed by examination technique (65%), abnormality identification (62%), history-taking (60%), patient presentation (60%), physical examination knowledge (47%), and differential diagnosis (40%) (p < .0001). Among 16 OSCE stations, scores ranged from 70% for arthritis to 29% for calf pain (p < .0001). Teaching sites accounted for larger adjusted differences in station scores, up to 28%, than in skill scores (9%) (p < .0001). Conclusions Students scored higher on interpersonal and technical skills than on interpretive or integrative skills. Station scores identified specific content that needs improved teaching. |
| distribution |
[
{
"@type": "dcat:Distribution",
"title": "Official Government Data Source",
"mediaType": "text/html",
"description": "Visit the original government dataset for complete information, documentation, and data access.",
"downloadURL": "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC80153/"
}
]
|
| identifier | https://healthdata.gov/api/views/mxua-tqeu |
| issued | 2025-07-14 |
| keyword |
[
"clinical-skills-assessment",
"medical-education",
"nih",
"osce-performance",
"physical-diagnosis"
]
|
| landingPage | https://healthdata.gov/d/mxua-tqeu |
| modified | 2025-09-06 |
| programCode |
[
"009:034"
]
|
| publisher |
{
"name": "National Institutes of Health",
"@type": "org:Organization"
}
|
| theme |
[
"NIH"
]
|
| title | How well do second-year students learn physical diagnosis? Observational study of an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) |
