Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 Jul 25;22(1):572.
doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03629-8.

The pedagogical value of near-peer feedback in online OSCEs

Julia Sader  1 , Bernard Cerutti  2 , Louise Meynard  3 , Frédéric Geoffroy  2 , Véronique Meister  3 , Adeline Paignon  3   4 , Noëlle Junod Perron  2
Affiliations

The pedagogical value of near-peer feedback in online OSCEs

Julia Sader et al. BMC Med Educ. .

Abstract

Purpose of the article: During the Covid-19 pandemic, formative OSCE were transformed into online OSCE, and senior students (near peers) substituted experienced clinical teachers. The aims of the study were to evaluate quality of the feedbacks given by near peers during online OSCEs and explore the experience of near-peer feedback from both learner's and near peer's perspectives.

Materials and methods: All 2nd year medical students (n = 158) attended an online OSCE under the supervision of twelve senior medical students. Outcome measures were 1) students' perception of the quality of the feedback through an online survey (Likert 1-5); 2) objective assessment of the quality of the feedback focusing on both the process and the content using a feedback scale (Likert 1-5); 3) experience of near peer feedback in two different focus groups.

Results: One hundred six medical students answered the questionnaire and had their feedback session videotaped. The mean perceived overall quality of senior students' overall feedback was 4.75 SD 0.52. They especially valued self-evaluation (mean 4.80 SD 0.67), balanced feedback (mean 4.93 SD 0.29) and provision of simulated patient's feedback (mean 4.97 SD 0.17). The overall objective assessment of the feedback quality was 3.73 SD 0.38: highly scored skills were subjectivity (mean 3.95 SD 1.12) and taking into account student's self-evaluation (mean 3.71 (SD 0.87). Senior students mainly addressed history taking issues (mean items 3.53 SD 2.37) and communication skills (mean items 4.89 SD 2.43) during feedback. Participants reported that near peer feedback was less stressful and more tailored to learning needs- challenges for senior students included to remain objective and to provide negative feedback.

Conclusion: Increased involvement of near peers in teaching activities is strongly supported for formative OSCE and should be implemented in parallel even if experience teachers are again involved in such teaching activities. However, it requires training not only on feedback skills but also on the specific content of the formative OSCE.

Keywords: Feedback; Near-peer; OSCE; Online.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Global feedback score assessed objectively (Likert scale 1–5, 1 = poor and 5 = excellent) of 2020 senior students and 2013 clinical teachers (A with no prior training in teaching skills – B with prior training in teaching skills)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Shute VJ. Focus on Formative Feedback. Rev Educ Res. 2008;78(1):153–189. doi: 10.3102/0034654307313795. - DOI
    1. Crommelinck M, Anseel F. Understanding and encouraging feedback-seeking behaviour: a literature review. Med Educ. 2013;47(3):232–241. doi: 10.1111/medu.12075. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Casey PM, Goepfert AR, Espey EL, Hammoud MM, Kaczmarczyk JM, Katz NT, Neutens JJ, Nuthalapaty FS, Peskin E, G. Association of Professors of, C. Obstetrics Undergraduate Medical Education To the point: reviews in medical education–the Objective Structured Clinical Examination. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2009;200(1):25–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2008.09.878. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Miller A, Archer J. Impact of workplace based assessment on doctors’ education and performance: a systematic review. BMJ. 2010;341:c5064. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c5064. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Norcini J, Burch V. Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31. Med Teach. 2007;29(9):855–71. doi: 10.1080/01421590701775453. - DOI - PubMed