Abstract
Background Any high-stakes assessment that leads to an important decision requires careful consideration in determining whether a student passes or fails. This observational study conducted in Erbil, Iraq, in June 2018 proposes a defensible pass/fail decision based on the number of failed competencies.
Methods Results were obtained for 150 medical students on their final objective structured clinical examination. Cutoff scores and pass/fail decisions were calculated using the modified Angoff, borderline, borderline-regression and holistic methods. The results were compared with each other and with a new competency method using Cohen’s kappa. Rasch analysis was used to compare the consistency of competency data with Rasch model estimates.
Results The competency method resulted in 40 (26.7%) students failing, compared with 76 (50.6%), 37 (24.6%), 35 (23.3%) and 13 (8%) for the modified Angoff, borderline, borderline regression and holistic methods, respectively. The competency method demonstrated a sufficient degree of fit to the Rasch model (mean outfit and infit statistics of 0.961 and 0.960, respectively).
Conclusions the competency method was more stringent in determining pass/fail, compared with other standard-setting methods, except for the modified Angoff method. The fit of competency data to the Rasch model provides evidence for the validity and reliability of pass/fail decisions.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by Hawler medical university. No contribution to data design, collection, analysis or interpretation was made by the funding resource. The funding process was for academic purposes only.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data will be provided on request
