Pooled learner acceptability of structured viva across 12 studies is 79.8% with high heterogeneity (I² = 93.506)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Overall acceptability of structured viva among learners was 79.8% (P < 0.001) based on numeric data from 12 studies. → Abuzied Abdelhamid Ibrahim Hassan 2023 q2 i? Heterogeneity was high (I² = 93.506, P < 0.001), requiring a binary random-effects model; Kendall's Tau = 0.47 (p = 0.016) also indicated heterogeneity. → Abuzied Abdelhamid Ibrahim Hassan 2023

Evidence¶

Abuzied Abdelhamid Ibrahim Hassan 2023¶

Abuzied Abdelhamid Ibrahim Hassan, Nabag Wisal Omer Mohamed. (2023). Structured viva validity, reliability, and acceptability as an assessment tool in health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04524-6

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analysis in OpenMeta[Analyst] of acceptability percentages from 12 of the 24 included studies, using a binary random-effects model due to high heterogeneity. Learners described the tool as "clear and fair and had a reasonable level of difficulty".

"Based on the available numeric data of the 12 studies, overall acceptability was (79.8%, P < 0.001) out of all learners who participated in structured viva as examinees at different levels in health professions education. The heterogeneity of the data was high (I^2 = 93.506, P < 0.001)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Structured viva shows positive significant correlations with standard assessment tools (MCQs, OSCE, structured theory exam) while traditional viva does not correlate significantly with the structured theory exam — related