Script concordance test as a sanctionnal evaluation in cardiology.

Introduction: Sanctioning evaluation in cardiology is carried out using multiple choice questions, short-answer questions, clinical cases and editorial questions. However, these methods do not assess clinical reasoning in a context of uncertainty in contrast with script concordance tests (SCT).

Aim: To compare the scores obtained by the students in the 3rd year of medicine with the SCT versus the sanctioning test of cardiology and to study the correlation between these two evaluation methods.

Methods: This is a prospective study including 31 3rd year students who completed their cardiology clerckship in the Cardiology Department of the HabibThameur Hospital during the first half of 2016. We compared the scores obtained in the 13 SCT test (39 items) with those of the cardiology normative test.

Results: Students 'mean score at SCT was significantly lower than that of experts (66.6 ± 10.2 vs 86 ± 6.7%, p <0.0001). The mean score obtained by students at the SCT was significantly higher than that of the cardiology sanctioning test (p <0.001). Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.71. There was no correlation between the two tests (r = 0.329; p= 0.07).

Conclusion: The evaluation of our students by the SCT showed mean score statistically higher than the questions of a classic test, without correlation between them. This should encourage us to incorporate SCT into our assessment methods to promote clinical reasoning.