Table 1 Students’ and specialists’ perceptions of the implementation of the mini-CE
No | What is your opinion on the Mini-CEX? | -------Students (n = 124)--------- | ------Specialists (n = 38)--------- | Students – Specialists’ comparison | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Median of Students (IR) | Median of Specialists (IR) | Mann-Whitney U Test | |||||||||||||
SD (%) | D (%) | N (%) | A (%) | SA (%) | SD (%) | D (%) | N (%) | A (%) | SA (%) | Z | Sig. | ||||
A | Practicality | ||||||||||||||
1 | The Mini-CEX is a practical assessment tool | 0 | 5 | 11 | 69 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 11 | 74 | 13 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −0.172 | 0.863 |
2 | The Mini-CEX is easy to use for examiners to observe my performance | 0 | 2 | 14 | 65 | 20 | 3 | 8 | 8 | 68 | 13 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −1.078 | 0.281 |
3 | When assessing clinical skills, the direct observations are useful for assessing my clinical skills | 0 | 2 | 5 | 66 | 27 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 53 | 45 | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | −2.065 | 0.039* |
4 | The Mini-CEX forms are clear | 2 | 3 | 18 | 65 | 12 | 0 | 3 | 24 | 58 | 16 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (3.00–4.00) | −0.032 | 0.974 |
5 | The Mini-CEX forms offer sufficient space for feedback | 0 | 4 | 19 | 65 | 13 | 0 | 3 | 16 | 71 | 11 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −0.214 | 0.830 |
B | Impact on learning | ||||||||||||||
1 | The Mini-CEX stimulates clinical teachers to observe students’ interactions with patients | 1 | 0 | 5 | 80 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 8 | 58 | 32 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | −1.455 | 0.146 |
2 | Direct observation is a strength of the Mini-CEX | 1 | 0 | 6 | 68 | 26 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 58 | 34 | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | −0.728 | 0.466 |
3 | The Mini-CEX has a positive effect on the student-teacher relationship | 1 | 1 | 14 | 68 | 17 | 3 | 3 | 21 | 55 | 18 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (3.00–4.00) | −0.907 | 0.365 |
4 | The Mini-CEX has impact on students’ learning processes | 1 | 1 | 8 | 67 | 23 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 68 | 13 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −1.817 | 0.069 |
5 | The Mini-CEX helps students prepare for the assessment in the final week of a clerkship | 1 | 0 | 8 | 65 | 26 | 5 | 5 | 8 | 53 | 29 | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | −0.538 | 0.590 |
6 | The assessor’s feedback helps students to improve their weaknesses | 1 | 1 | 7 | 62 | 29 | 0 | 5 | 11 | 63 | 21 | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −1.340 | 0.180 |
7 | The assessor’s feedback is helpful in daily clinical practice | 2 | 1 | 10 | 60 | 27 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 61 | 18 | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −1.408 | 0.159 |
8 | Feedback is a strength of the mini-CEX | 1 | 0 | 10 | 54 | 35 | 0 | 5 | 16 | 53 | 26 | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | 4.00 (4.00–5.00) | −1.593 | 0.111 |
9 | The Mini-CEX impacts on students’ self-directed learning | 1 | 1 | 11 | 65 | 22 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 58 | 21 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −0.869 | 0.385 |
10 | Students’ past Mini-CEX results affected their recent Mini-CEX outcomes | 1 | 2 | 13 | 65 | 19 | 3 | 5 | 26 | 53 | 13 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (3.00–4.00) | −2.140 | 0.032* |
11 | Experiences students gained from Mini-CEX assessments are applicable to daily clinical practice | 1 | 1 | 8 | 68 | 23 | 0 | 5 | 8 | 63 | 24 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.25) | −0.219 | 0.827 |
C | Professional development | ||||||||||||||
1 | The Mini-CEX has influenced students’ professional development as a doctor | 1 | 0 | 7 | 73 | 19 | 3 | 3 | 11 | 66 | 18 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −0.861 | 0.389 |
2 | The Mini-CEX has influenced students’ perspective on patient care | 1 | 0 | 11 | 69 | 19 | 3 | 3 | 13 | 63 | 18 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | −0.718 | 0.473 |
3 | The Mini-CEX has influenced students’ interactions with patients and their families | 1 | 2 | 15 | 64 | 18 | 3 | 3 | 18 | 55 | 21 | 4.00 (4.00–4.00) | 4.00 (3.75–4.00) | −0.191 | 0.848 |