Got An BIRB 796 Doubtfulness ? You Must Consider This Advice
7,8,9 Two OSCE cases were used in this study: case 1 was used in the experimental group prior to PRW and case 2 was used in the experimental and control groups prior to and following the year of APPE rotations. The use of two different OSCE cases (cases 1 and Crizotinib 2) to evaluate the impact of the PRW on the experimental group��s clinical skills (a primary endpoint) was to avoid the possibility of immediate recall of case specifics over the three days of PRW. The other primary endpoint, impact of the PRW on students�� preparation for rotations, was determined by comparing the experimental and control groups using two endpoints: First, performance on an OSCE (case 2) at the start of the APPE rotations year was compared between the study and control groups. Second, the two groups were compared using a standardized evaluation of students�� rotation performance completed by faculty preceptors during the first week of a clinical APPE (involving direct patient care responsibilities). Every attempt was made to blind faculty preceptors to PRW participation. A small portion of faculty preceptors (3 out of 22 total) included study investigators; therefore it was impossible to blind every preceptor. However, student assignments to clinical rotations were completely random. All participants were evaluated using a standardized form, which assessed the five core areas of competency (patient R428 molecular weight charts, medication histories, SOAP notes, patient presentations, and professionalism) with a rating scale of 1 (low) to 7 (high). Secondary endpoints included the impact of the PRW on APPE performance and on retention of clinical skills. Impact UGT1A7 of the PRW on rotation performance was evaluated by comparing experimental to control groups using the previously described standardized evaluation of students�� rotation performance completed by faculty preceptors upon completion of a clinical APPE. Retention of clinical skills was evaluated by comparing the experimental and control groups�� performance on an OSCE at the end of fourth year APPE rotations. For this endpoint, the second OSCE case (case 2) was administered at both the start and completion of the year of APPE rotations in both groups. The possibility of students recalling specifics of case 2 as a confounding variable was not considered to be an issue because of the time that elapsed for this endpoint. The use of the same case was thought to help minimize differences in student specific knowledge as well. Data Analysis Performance on the OSCE was graded by the study investigators using a grading rubric specific to the two cases (cases 1 and 2) used in the study. Results were then interpreted to be passing (grade ��70%) or failing (grade
