Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Examining the effects of gaming and guessing on script concordance test scores Cover

Examining the effects of gaming and guessing on script concordance test scores

Open Access
|Jun 2018

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Example of a Script Concordance Test item featuring 3 questions nested within one case. Clinical scenario: You are evaluating a 63-year-old woman with left-sided weakness in the Emergency Department of your hospital

If you were thinking …:

And then you find …:

Your hypothesis becomes …:

Q1. Brain abscess

Patient had dental work 1 month ago

−2

−1

0

+1

+2

Q2. Stroke

Patient uses a vaginal oestrogen cream once daily

−2

−1

0

+1

+2

Q3. Brain metastasis

Normal non-contrast CT head

−2

−1

0

+1

+2

−2: Ruled out or almost ruled out; −1: Less likely; 0: Neither more nor less likely; +1: More likely; +2: Certain or almost certain

Table 2

Test characteristics

Radiation-oncology [20]

Neurology [21]

General surgery [22]

Participants

N clerks

70

 8

  0

N residents (R1–R5)

38

41

202

N panellists

42

16

 21

Items

N cases

30

24

 43

N questions

70

79

131

Proportion of items with panel modal response:

−2

 6%

 9%

 26%

−1

38%

27%

 40%

0

24%

29%

 27%

+1

22%

29%

  3%

+2

10%

 6%

  3%

Cronbach’s alpha

 0.90

 0.79

  0.85

Table 3

Distribution of responses according to sub-groups of respondents

−2

−1

 0

+1

+2

Radiation-oncology

Clerks

10%

28%

28%

22%

12%

Residents

 9%

27%

22%

28%

14%

Panellists

11%

27%

29%

20%

13%

Neurology

Clerks

13%

30%

23%

25%

10%

Residents

10%

30%

23%

25%

12%

Panellists

10%

28%

31%

23%

 8%

General surgery

Residents

19%

38%

23%

14%

 6%

Panellists

25%

34%

23%

11%

 7%

Table 4

Scores of actual respondents, a hypothetical examinee providing random answers (i.e. guessing), and a hypothetical examinee using an ‘all 0’ strategy (i.e. gaming)

Groups

N

Mean

SD

Z score*

Radiation-oncology

Actual respondents

Clerks

 70

51.6

8.2

Residents

 38

71.2

9.5

All examinees

108

59.3

9.7

Guessing

Random 5

100

35.8

4.0

−2.42

Random 3

100

43.7

2.7

−1.63

Gaming

All 0

52.2

−0.73

Neurology

Actual respondents

Clerks

  8

63.6

6.3

Residents

 41

70.3

8.8

All examinees

 49

67.9

8.8

Guessing

Random 5

100

35.9

4.4

−3.6

Random 3

100

50.9

4.1

−2.0

Gaming

All 0

53.2

−1.7

General surgery

Actual respondents

Residents

202

68.1

7.4

Guessing

Random 5

100

42.6

3.0

−3.4

Random 3

100

53.8

3.2

−1.9

Gaming

All 0

51.7

−2.2

*Z scores indicate by how many standard deviations a score deviates from the mean

Table 5

Effect on actual respondent scores (using data from Lambert et al. [22]) of excluding questions with a modal panel response of 0 one-by-one, and recalculating the examinee’s final score after each item was discarded. In shaded rows, a pass-fail threshold of 2 standard deviations below the mean would ensure that gamers fail the test

N of questions with a modal panel response of 0

% Questions with a modal panel response of 0

‘All-0’ score for a hypothetical examinee

Mean score of actual examinees

Min

Max

All 0 z score

Cronbach’s alpha

22

24.4%

52.2

62.0

37.3

84.1

−0.90

0.904

21

23.3%

51.0

61.2

37.3

83.0

−0.95

0.902

20

22.2%

49.9

60.5

36.2

81.8

−1.00

0.900

19

21.1%

48.8

59.7

35.8

80.7

−1.04

0.896

18

20.0%

47.7

59.2

35.8

79.6

−1.12

0.893

17

18.9%

46.6

58.5

35.8

78.5

−1.18

0.892

16

17.8%

45.5

57.9

35.8

77.4

−1.27

0.891

15

16.7%

44.4

57.4

35.6

76.3

−1.34

0.891

14

15.6%

43.3

56.8

35.5

75.2

−1.42

0.888

13

14.4%

42.2

56.3

35.4

74.1

−1.52

0.884

12

13.3%

41.0

55.8

34.3

73.6

−1.61

0.882

11

12.2%

39.9

55.1

34.1

72.7

−1.67

0.881

10

11.1%

38.8

54.2

33.7

71.6

−1.72

0.879

 9

10.0%

37.7

53.6

33.9

70.8

−1.87

0.876

 8

 8.9%

36.6

52.9

32.6

70.4

−1.94

0.875

 7

 7.8%

35.5

52.3

31.5

69.3

−1.99

0.871

 6

 6.7%

34.4

51.7

31.1

68.2

−2.08

0.868

 5

 5.6%

33.3

51.4

30.4

68.2

−2.19

0.865

 4

 4.4%

32.3

50.6

30.0

67.1

−2.22

0.865

 3

 3.3%

31.0

50.1

30.0

66.8

−2.37

0.860

 2

 2.2%

29.9

49.3

29.4

65.6

−2.43

0.858

 1

 1.1%

28.8

48.6

29.2

65.1

−2.52

0.857

 0

 0.0%

27.7

47.7

28.3

64.0

−2.53

0.859

Fig. 1

Z-score of a ‘gamer’ on subtests with different proportions of questions with modal panel responses of 0

Language: English
Published on: Jun 12, 2018
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2018 Stuart Lubarsky, Valérie Dory, Sarkis Meterissian, Carole Lambert, Robert Gagnon Gagnon, published by Bohn Stafleu van Loghum
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.