Formative assessments during COVID-19 pandemic: an observational study on performance and experiences of medical students

Background: Because of COVID-19, the 2020 written medical examinations were replaced by mandatory formative online assessments. This study aimed to determine students' performance, self-assessment of performance, and perception about the switch from a summative to a formative approach. Methods: Medical students from year 2 to 5 (n=648) were included. They could repeat each test once or twice. They rated their performance after each attempt and were then given their score. Detailed feedback was given at the end of the session. An online survey determined medical students' perception about the reorganization of education. Two items concerned the switch from summative to formative assessments Results: Formative assessments involved 2385 examinees totaling 3197 attempts. Among examinees, 30.8% made at least 2 attempts. Scores increased significantly at the second attempt (median 9.4, IQR 10.8), and duration decreased (median -31.0, IQR 48.0). More than half of examinees (54.6%) underestimated their score, female students more often than male. Low performers overestimated, while high performers underestimated their scores. Students approved of the switch to formative assessments. Stress was lessened but motivation for learning decreased. Conclusions: Medical students' better scores at a second attempt support a benefit of detailed feedback, learning time and re-test opportunity on performance. Decreased learning motivation and a minority of students repeating the formative assessments point to the positive influence of summative assessment on learning.

Medical students' perceptions and coping strategies during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: studies, clinical implication, and professional identity.

BACKGROUND: The unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic during spring 2020 has disrupted medical education worldwide. The University of Geneva decided to shift on-site classwork to online learning; many exams were transformed from summative to formative evaluations and most clinical activities were suspended. We aimed to investigate the perceived impact of those adaptations by the students at the Faculty of Medicine. METHODS: We sent an online self-administered survey to medical students from years 2 to 6 of the University of Geneva, three months after the beginning of the pandemic. The survey explored students' main activities during the first three months of the pandemic, the impact of the crisis on their personal life, on their training and on their professional identity, the level of stress they experienced and which coping strategies they developed. The survey consisted of open-ended and closed questions and was administered in French. RESULTS: A total of 58.8% of students responded (n = 467) and were homogeneously distributed across gender. At the time of the survey, two thirds of the participants were involved in COVID-19-related activities; 72.5% voluntarily participated, mainly fueled by a desire to help and feel useful. Many participants (58.8%) reported a feeling of isolation encountered since the start of the pandemic. Main coping strategies reported were physical activity and increased telecommunications with their loved ones. Most students described a negative impact of the imposed restrictions on their training, reporting decreased motivation and concentration in an unusual or distraction-prone study environment at home and missing interactions with peers and teachers. Students recruited to help at the hospital in the context of increasing staff needs reported a positive impact due to the enriched clinical exposure. Perceived stress levels were manageable across the surveyed population. If changed, the crisis had a largely positive impact on students' professional identity; most highlighted the importance of the health care profession for society and confirmed their career choice. CONCLUSION: Through this comprehensive picture, our study describes the perceived impact of the pandemic on University of Geneva medical students, their training and their professional identity three months after the start of the pandemic. These results allowed us to gain valuable insight that reinforced the relevance of assessing the evolution of the situation in the long run and the importance of developing institutional support tools for medical students throughout their studies.

Diagnostic Accuracy of SARS-CoV-2 Rapid Antigen Detection Testing in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Children in the Clinical Setting.

Antigen-based rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are used in children despite the lack of data. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of the Panbio-COVID-19 Ag Rapid Test Device (P-RDT) in children. Symptomatic and asymptomatic participants 0 to 16 years old had two nasopharyngeal swabs (NPS) for both reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) and P-RDT. A total of 822 participants completed the study, of which 533 (64.9%) were symptomatic. Among the 119 (14.5%) RT-PCR-positive patients, the P-RDT sensitivity was 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57 to 0.74). Mean viral load (VL) was higher among P-RDT-positive patients than negative ones (P < 0.001). Sensitivity was 0.91 in specimens with VL of >1.0E6 IU/ml (95% CI 0.83 to 0.99) and decreased to 0.75 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.83) for specimens >1.0E3 IU/ml. Among symptomatic participants, the P-RDT displayed a sensitivity of 0.73 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.82), which peaked at 1.00 at 2 days post-onset of symptoms (DPOS) (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00), then decreased to 0.56 (95% CI 0.23 to 0.88) at 5 DPOS. There was a trend toward lower P-RDT sensitivity in symptomatic children <12 years (0.62 [95% CI 0.45 to 0.78]) versus ≥12 years (0.80 [95% CI 0.69 to 0.91]; P = 0.09). In asymptomatic participants, the P-RDT displayed a sensitivity of 0.43 (95% CI 0.26 to 0.61). Specificity was 1.00 in symptomatic and asymptomatic children (95% CI 0.99 to 1.00). The overall 73% and 43% sensitivities of P-RDT in symptomatic and asymptomatic children, respectively, was below the 80% cutoff recommended by the World Health Organization. We observed a correlation between VL and P-RDT sensitivity, as well as variation of sensitivity according to DPOS, a major determinant of VL. These data highlight the limitations of RDTs in children, with the potential exception in early symptomatic children ≥12yrs.