Comparing the influence of 'describing findings to the examiner' or 'examining as in usual practice' on the students' performance and assessors' judgements during physical examination skills assessment.

Neither the station (Wald χ 2 =0.013,p=0.90) nor the iteration of the study (Wald χ 2 =3.18,p=0.075) influenced ratings of the fluency of presentations, although as the latter showed a trend towards significance we included its interaction with the “describing” condition in the model which was non-significant (Wald χ 2 =0.01,p=0.91) and changed the findings only minimally.

also in 53,322 other papers

There was a trend towards significance for the “describing findings” condition (describing median examiner cognitive load = 5.25 (IQR=0.6), usual practice median examiner cognitive load = 5.50 (IQR=0.6) Wald χ 2 = 2.86, p=0.091), although following Bonferroni correction of the significance level to p=0.025 this parameter was non-significant.

also in 2,760 other papers