Approaches to Ensure Quality Standards for Standardized/ Simulated Patient Performance in High Stakes Objective Structured Clinical Exams (OSCEs)

Introduction To meet the quality standards for high-stakes OSCEs, it is necessary to ensure high quality standardized performance of the SPs involved.[1] One of the ways this can be assured is through the assessment of the quality of SPs` performance in training and during the assessment. There is some literature concerning validated instruments that have been used to assess SP performance in formative contexts but very little related to high stakes contexts.[2], [3], [4]. Content and structure During this workshop different approaches to quality control for SPs` performance, developed in medicine, pharmacy and nursing OSCEs, will be introduced. Participants will have the opportunity to use these approaches in simulated interactions. Advantages and disadvantages of these approaches will be discussed. Anticipated outcomes By the end of this session, participants will be able to discuss the rationale for quality control of SPs` performance in high stakes OSCEs, outline key factors in creating strategies for quality control, identify various strategies for assuring quality control, and reflect on applications to their own practice. Who should attend The workshop is designed for those interested in quality assurance of SP performance in high stakes OSCEs. Level All levels are welcome. References Adamo G. 2003. Simulated and standardized patients in OSCEs: achievements and challenges:1992-2003. Med Teach. 25(3), 262- 270. Wind LA, Van Dalen J, Muijtjens AM, Rethans JJ. Assessing simulated patients in an educational setting: the MaSP (Maastricht Assessment of Simulated Patients). Med Educ 2004, 38(1):39-44. Bouter S, van Weel-Baumgarten E, Bolhuis S. Construction and validation of the Nijmegen Evaluation of the Simulated Patient (NESP): Assessing Simulated Patients' ability to role-play and provide feedback to students. Acad Med: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 2012. May W, Fisher D, Souder D: Development of an instrument to measure the quality of standardized/simulated patient verbal feedback. Med Educ 2012, 2(1).

Increasing Scientific Confidence in Adverse Outcome Pathways: Application of Tailored Bradford-Hill Considerations for Evaluating Weight of Evidence.

Systematic consideration of scientific support is a critical element in developing and, ultimately, using adverse outcome pathways (AOPs) for various regulatory applications. Though weight of evidence (WoE) analysis has been proposed as a basis for assessment of the maturity and level of confidence in an AOP, methodologies and tools are still being formalized. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Users' Handbook Supplement to the Guidance Document for Developing and Assessing AOPs (OECD 2014a; hereafter referred to as the OECD AOP Handbook) provides tailored Bradford-Hill (BH) considerations for systematic assessment of confidence in a given AOP. These considerations include (1) biological plausibility and (2) empirical support (dose-response, temporality, and incidence) for Key Event Relationships (KERs), and (3) essentiality of key events (KEs). Here, we test the application of these tailored BH considerations and the guidance outlined in the OECD AOP Handbook using a number of case examples to increase experience in more transparently documenting rationales for assigned levels of confidence to KEs and KERs, and to promote consistency in evaluation within and across AOPs. The major lessons learned from experience are documented, and taken together with the case examples, should contribute to better common understanding of the nature and form of documentation required to increase confidence in the application of AOPs for specific uses. Based on the tailored BH considerations and defining questions, a prototype quantitative model for assessing the WoE of an AOP using tools of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is described. The applicability of the approach is also demonstrated using the case example aromatase inhibition leading to reproductive dysfunction in fish. Following the acquisition of additional experience in the development and assessment of AOPs, further refinement of parameterization of the model through expert elicitation is recommended. Overall, the application of quantitative WoE approaches hold promise to enhance the rigor, transparency and reproducibility for AOP WoE determinations and may play an important role in delineating areas where research would have the greatest impact on improving the overall confidence in the AOP.