[脚本一致性测试专家小组:真正充分的参考资料?]

Luc Dauchet, Raphaël Bentegeac, Haress Ghauss, Marc Hazzan, Patrick Truffert, Philippe Amouyel, Victoria Gauthier, Aghilès Hamroun
{"title":"[脚本一致性测试专家小组:真正充分的参考资料?]","authors":"Luc Dauchet, Raphaël Bentegeac, Haress Ghauss, Marc Hazzan, Patrick Truffert, Philippe Amouyel, Victoria Gauthier, Aghilès Hamroun","doi":"10.1016/j.revmed.2024.05.023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Script Concordance Tests (SCTs) are an examination modality introduced by decree in the French National Ranking Exam for medical students in 2024. Their objective is to evaluate clinical reasoning in situations of uncertainty. In practice, SCTs assess the impact of new information on the probability of a hypothesis formulated a priori based on an authentic clinical scenario. This approach resembles probabilistic (or Bayesian) reasoning. Due to the uncertainty associated with the explored clinical situation, SCTs do not compare the student's response to an expected one in a theoretical knowledge reference. Instead, the distribution of responses from a panel of experienced physicians is used to establish the question's scoring scale. Literature data suggest that physicians, even experienced ones, like most humans, often exhibit biased intuitive probabilistic reasoning. These biases raise questions about the relevance of using expert panel responses as scoring scales for SCTs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94122,"journal":{"name":"La Revue de medecine interne","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[The expert panel for Script Concordance Tests: A truly adequate reference?]\",\"authors\":\"Luc Dauchet, Raphaël Bentegeac, Haress Ghauss, Marc Hazzan, Patrick Truffert, Philippe Amouyel, Victoria Gauthier, Aghilès Hamroun\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.revmed.2024.05.023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The Script Concordance Tests (SCTs) are an examination modality introduced by decree in the French National Ranking Exam for medical students in 2024. Their objective is to evaluate clinical reasoning in situations of uncertainty. In practice, SCTs assess the impact of new information on the probability of a hypothesis formulated a priori based on an authentic clinical scenario. This approach resembles probabilistic (or Bayesian) reasoning. Due to the uncertainty associated with the explored clinical situation, SCTs do not compare the student's response to an expected one in a theoretical knowledge reference. Instead, the distribution of responses from a panel of experienced physicians is used to establish the question's scoring scale. Literature data suggest that physicians, even experienced ones, like most humans, often exhibit biased intuitive probabilistic reasoning. These biases raise questions about the relevance of using expert panel responses as scoring scales for SCTs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94122,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"La Revue de medecine interne\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"La Revue de medecine interne\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revmed.2024.05.023\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"La Revue de medecine interne","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.revmed.2024.05.023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

脚本一致性测试(SCT)是根据法令于 2024 年在法国医科学生国家排名考试中引入的一种考试方式。其目的是评估在不确定情况下的临床推理能力。在实践中,SCT 根据真实的临床场景,评估新信息对先验假设概率的影响。这种方法类似于概率(或贝叶斯)推理。由于所探究的临床情景具有不确定性,因此 SCT 不会将学生的反应与理论知识参考中的预期反应进行比较。取而代之的是,利用经验丰富的医生小组的回答分布来确定问题的评分标准。文献数据表明,即使是经验丰富的医生,也会像大多数人一样,经常表现出有偏差的直观概率推理。这些偏差使人们对使用专家小组的回答作为小班教学评分标准的相关性产生了疑问。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[The expert panel for Script Concordance Tests: A truly adequate reference?]

The Script Concordance Tests (SCTs) are an examination modality introduced by decree in the French National Ranking Exam for medical students in 2024. Their objective is to evaluate clinical reasoning in situations of uncertainty. In practice, SCTs assess the impact of new information on the probability of a hypothesis formulated a priori based on an authentic clinical scenario. This approach resembles probabilistic (or Bayesian) reasoning. Due to the uncertainty associated with the explored clinical situation, SCTs do not compare the student's response to an expected one in a theoretical knowledge reference. Instead, the distribution of responses from a panel of experienced physicians is used to establish the question's scoring scale. Literature data suggest that physicians, even experienced ones, like most humans, often exhibit biased intuitive probabilistic reasoning. These biases raise questions about the relevance of using expert panel responses as scoring scales for SCTs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Atypical and/or systemic dermatologic disorders related to immune checkpoint inhibitors: A review]. [Management of congenital thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura in the era of recombinant ADAMTS13 protein: Recommendations from the Reference Center for Thrombotic Microangiopathies (CNR-MAT)]. [Diagnosis and management of delirium in older adults]. [In patients with heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction, is finerenone effective in reducing a composite of heart failure exacerbation and cardiovascular death compared to placebo, and is it safe?] [The publications that change… the internist's Christmas eve].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1