Claims

The Modified Angoff method was acceptable for setting different pass marks for senior and junior residents on the same OSCE

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? Modified Angoff standard setting allowed different pass marks for senior and junior residents on one OSCE, reducing development burden. → 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

Quantitative descriptive standard-setting study (Dwyer, Wright, et al. 2016) with orthopedics residents, reported via the review. It found the Modified Angoff method acceptable for differentiating pass marks; the review notes pass marks were not significantly changed by judges' subspecialty training. No effect size is printed.

"the Modified Angoff method was an acceptable method of setting different pass marks for senior and junior residents"

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.