Does studying for an objective structured clinical examination make a difference?

PURPOSE: This study examines the extent to which second-year medical students studied for an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), how they studied, and the impact of self-reported studying on OSCE performance. METHOD: One class of 113 medical students completed an end-of-second-year OSCE, held on two consecutive evenings. The OSCE was comprised of eight stations, each of which was of 20 minutes' duration. The OSCE was formative: students received performance feedback but were not graded. Prior to the OSCE, students completed a brief survey regarding their preparation for the OSCE and their perceptions of confidence, anxiety and preparedness. Only 78 students returned surveys with names, comprising the data for these analyses. RESULTS: Mean studying time was 3.3 h, ranging from 0 to 19 h. Studying time was positively associated with age and negatively associated with basic science examination scores. The most study time was dedicated to reviewing the physical examination textbook, class notes and supplemental course readings. The breadth of study strategies increased as more time was spent in OSCE preparation. OSCE performance was related to study time and to achievement on pre-clinical basic science examinations. DISCUSSION: The students whose performance was above average seemed to be the talented students whose records indicated a history of academic success. The amount of time they reported for OSCE preparation was comparable to that reported by students with below average performance. It appears that prior academic performance rather than preparatory studying time is a better predictor of OSCE outcomes.