Publication date: Oct 24, 2024

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated rapid adaptation of clinical competence assessments, including the transition of Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE) from in-person to virtual formats. This study investigates the construct equivalence of a high-stakes OSCE, originally designed for in-person delivery, when adapted for a virtual format. A retrospective analysis was conducted using OSCE scores from the Internationally Educated Nurse Competency Assessment Program (IENCAP(R)). Data were collected from 15 exam administrations between January 2018 and June 2022, encompassing 2021 examinees (1936 in-person, 85 virtual). The Many-Facet Rasch Measurement (MFRM) model was employed to analyze the invariance of examinee ability, case difficulty, and criteria difficulty across in-person and virtual formats. Results revealed overall examinee ability estimates remained invariant regardless of the OSCE format, while invariant violations were identified in only three of the 15 cases (N = 20%) adapted to suit the virtual format. The most significant adaptation, namely the use of a verbal physical examination to suit the virtual context achieved equivalence to its hands-on in-person counterpart given evidence of invariance across criteria estimates. Interestingly, criteria scores in invariant violated cases displayed a higher level of stability or consistency across the virtual OSCE formats versus their in-person counterpart highlighting a potential benefit of the virtual versus in-person format and potentially linked to the verbal physical examination. The study found that while examinee ability and case difficulty estimates exhibited some invariance between in-person and virtual OSCE formats, criteria involving physical assessments faced challenges in maintaining construct equivalence. These findings highlight the need for careful consideration in adapting high-stakes clinical assessments to virtual formats to ensure fairness and reliability.

Semantics

Original Article