Claims

Candidates receiving additional musculoskeletal training (lectures, workshops, video, spaced education, or SCIM) scored higher or similar on OSCEs compared with controls

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Across five intervention studies, trained candidates scored higher than or similar to control groups on OSCEs. → El Sherif Reem 2024

Evidence

El Sherif Reem 2024

El Sherif Reem, Shrier Ian, Paul-Tellier Pierre, Rodriguez Charo. (2024). What do we know about Objective Structured Clinical Examination in Sport and Exercise Medicine? A scoping review. Canadian Medical Education Journal. https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.77841

q3 · i? · review · r2

Synthesis of five included studies of supplemental MSK training formats (lectures, workshop, instructional video, spaced education, structured clinical instruction modules). The review reports trained candidates "scored higher or had similar OSCE scores compared to the control group"; no pooled effect size is printed.

"All studies reported that candidates exposed to training scored higher or had similar OSCE scores compared to the control group."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.