Title:
Precision in Clinical Evaluation: Integrating Borderline Regression Into OSCEs at Defence Services Medical Academy (DSMA)

Authors:
Tun Tun Naing, Thaung Tan Soe,Tayzar Hein, Zaw Phyo, Pyi Hein Kyaw, Zin Min Htike Darli Aung, Khun Tun Hlaing, Khin Aung Htun & Ye Phyo Aung, Myanmar

Abstract:

Background: The Defence Services Medical Academy (DSMA) uses Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) for assessing clinical competencies, including Obstetric and Gynaecology High-Stakes OSCE. However, the optimal method for assessing clinical performance remains contentious. 

Objective: This paper aims to compare the results from two assessment methods—checklist scoring (CL) and global rating score with borderline regression (BRM)—to see if there are significant differences in how students' clinical skills are evaluated.

Methods: This study investigated data from thirty three students who participated in 15 OSCE stations at DSMA. Each student was evaluated utilising both comprehensive ratings and checklist scores. The passing thresholds for each station were determined using the Borderline Regression method. Results from both approaches were compared using paired T-tests to find any statistically significant differences in performance evaluation.

Results: The study found no significant differences between Borderline Regression and checklist methods in performance evaluations, with all stations' p-values being either 1.000 or closely approximated 1.000.

Discussion: The study found that Borderline Regression can be effectively combined with checklist scoring to improve the fairness and accuracy of passing thresholds without disrupting the assessment process.

Conclusion: The study suggests that integrating both assessment methods at DSMA can enhance the reliability and fairness of OSCE evaluations, but further research is needed to understand their long-term impact.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.51505/ijmshr.2025.9402