Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Will the CASC stand the test? A review and critical evaluation of the new MRCPsych clinical examination

  • Catherine M. Thompson (a1)
Summary

The aim of this paper is to review and critically evaluate the Clinical Assessment of Skills and Competencies (CASC) examination, introduced in June 2008. the history of clinical membership examinations and rationale for the new examination are considered. the development and implementation of the examination is described by means of a four-step model of assessment. Finally, the paper critically evaluates the assessment with reference to validity, reliability, practicability and effect on learner.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Will the CASC stand the test? A review and critical evaluation of the new MRCPsych clinical examination
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Will the CASC stand the test? A review and critical evaluation of the new MRCPsych clinical examination
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Will the CASC stand the test? A review and critical evaluation of the new MRCPsych clinical examination
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
Bloom, B. (1971) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: the Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. David Mackay.
Fowell, S. L., Southgate, L. J. & Bligh, J. G. (1999) Evaluating assessment: the missing link? Medical Education, 33, 276281.
General Medical Council (2006). Good Medical Practice. GMC.
Harden, R. M. & Gleeson, F. A. (1979) Assessment of clinical competence using an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). Medical Education, 13, 4154.
Hodges, B., Regeher, G., Hanson, M. et al (1997) An objective examination for evaluating psychiatric clinical clerks. Academic Medicine, 72, 715721.
Hodges, B., Regehr, G., Hanson, M., et al (1998) Validation of an objective structured clinical examination in psychiatry. Academic Medicine, 73, 910912.
Hodges, B., Regeher, G., McNaughton, N., et al (1999) OSCE checklists do not capture increasing levels of expertise. Academic Medicine, 74, 11291134.
Miller, G. (1990) The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Academic Medicine, 65 (suppl.), s63s67.
Newble, D. I. & Swanson, D. B. (1988) Psychometric characteristics of the objective structured clinical examination. Medical Education, 22, 325334.
Rethans, J., Sturmans, F., Drop, R., et al (1991) Does competence of general practitioners predict their performance? Comparison between examination setting and actual practice. BMJ, 303, 13771380.
Royal College of Psychiatrists (2006). A Competency Based Curriculum for Specialist Training in Psychiatry. Royal College of Psychiatrists.
Tyrer, S. & Oyebode, F. (2004) Why does the MRCPsych examination need to change? British Journal of Psychiatry, 184, 197199.
Wass, V., Jones, R. & Van Der Vieutson, C. (2001) Standardised or real patients to test clinical competence? the long case revisited. Medical Education, 35, 321325.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 0955-6036
  • EISSN: 1472-1473
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 4 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 30 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 17th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Will the CASC stand the test? A review and critical evaluation of the new MRCPsych clinical examination

  • Catherine M. Thompson (a1)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *