Agreement between 2 raters' evaluations of a traditional prosthodontic practical exam integrated with directly observed procedural skills in Egypt
- Author:
Ahmed Khalifa KHALIFA
1
;
Salah HEGAZY
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions 2018;15():23-
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE:This study aimed to assess the agreement between 2 raters in evaluations of students on a prosthodontic clinical practical exam integrated with directly observed procedural skills (DOPS).
METHODS:A sample of 76 students was monitored by 2 raters to evaluate the process and the final registered maxillomandibular relation for a completely edentulous patient at Mansoura Dental School, Egypt on a practical exam of bachelor’s students from May 15 to June 28, 2017. Each registered relation was evaluated from a total of 60 marks subdivided into 3 score categories: occlusal plane orientation (OPO), vertical dimension registration (VDR), and centric relation registration (CRR). The marks for each category included an assessment of DOPS. The marks of OPO and VDR for both raters were compared using the graph method to measure reliability through Bland and Altman analysis. The reliability of the CRR marks was evaluated by the Krippendorff alpha ratio.
RESULTS:The results revealed highly similar marks between raters for OPO (mean= 18.1 for both raters), with close limits of agreement (0.73 and −0.78). For VDR, the mean marks were close (mean= 17.4 and 17.1 for examiners 1 and 2, respectively), with close limits of agreement (2.7 and −2.2). There was a strong correlation (Krippendorff alpha ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.79–0.99) between the raters in the evaluation of CRR.
CONCLUSION:The 2 raters' evaluation of a clinical traditional practical exam integrated with DOPS showed no significant differences in the evaluations of candidates at the end of a clinical prosthodontic course. The limits of agreement between raters could be optimized by excluding subjective evaluation parameters and complicated cases from the examination procedure.
