In the medical interview portion of the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), we usually use both detailed checklists and a global rating scale to evaluate a student's performance. In the present study we investigated a problem with the detailed checklists.
1) The quality of the assessment of information-gathering capability was investigated in a station for the medical interview in a pharmaceutical OSCE.
2)A video review revealed a 7% error in the detailed checklist assessment at the OSCE station.
3) Following the interview in this study, the students wrote down the information they had gathered. These results differed by 15.6% from those of the detailed checklist assessment at the OSCE station.
4) In the present style of OSCE, the detailed checklist assessment at the OSCE station is problematic. The style in which the students write down the gathered information after the interview might be re-considered.

Qualitative research has gained greater attention in medical research, but it might seem to be unscientific because qualitative and quantitative research methods are grounded in different paradigm.
In this article, we introduce three major qualitative research methods frequently used in studies of patient-doctor communications: 1) in-depth interviews; 2) focus group interviews and, 3) semi-structured interviews.
Each qualitative research method has different or common advantages and disadvantages, and which methods should be used depends on the study objectives. Qualitative research and quantitative research are complementary: while quantitative research explains the prevalence or variation of an issue, qualitative research explains the reasons or processes of that prevalence or variation. Combination of the two methods enables the gathering of more comprehensive and explanatory results.

Background: Taking a good history is important for the diagnosis of abdominal pain. We investigated questionnaire items that were significantly correlated with causes of abdominal pain requiring hospitalization. We also studied the combination of responses that could exclude severe disease.
Method: Between February 2006 and December 2007, 296 of 317 patients with abdominal pain who attended our Outpatient Department completed a questionnaire for their abdominal pain. They included 32 patients requiring hospitalization (severe group) and 264 other patients (mild group). The percentage of positive responses to each questionnaire item was compared between the two groups, and those showing a significant difference were employed for logistic regression analysis.
Results: The following 4 responses were selected: “It is less than 7 days since the onset of pain” (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.2-6.4); “The pain is exacerbated by walking” (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.3-6.2); “The pain is accompanied by weight loss” (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.5-9.8); and “The pain wakes me at night” (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-5.2). If a patient had none of these responses, the predictive value was 0.03 for severe disease.
Conclusions: Our findings suggested that pain reported within 7 days, exacerbation by walking, nocturnal awakening, and associated weight loss are features of abdominal pain that predict severe disease. Conversely, severe disease can be almost completely excluded in patients negative for all 4 features.