Operationalising readiness for practice in final OSCEs: insights from a mixed-methods study across five Australian medical schools

Readiness for practice (RFP) is a critical outcome for medical education, reflecting a graduate’s ability to transition from student to clinician. Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) play a pivotal role in evaluating RFP. This study aimed to investigate the conceptualisation and operationalisation of RFP within the OSCE context and evaluate the contribution of a newly developed RFP-focused rating tool compared to traditional OSCE scoring. Utilising a sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach, this study was conducted across five Australian medical schools. Quantitative data from final-year medical students’ OSCE results were analysed to examine correlations between RFP scores and components of a 5-item Process of Decision-Making (PDM) checklist: safety, reliability, trustworthiness, insight, and an organised/logical approach. In the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews with OSCE examiners were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to explore their perceptions of RFP and decision-making processes. Quantitative analyses of 550 medical students’ OSCE performance datasets revealed that global rating had the strongest correlation with RFP scores, followed by safety and reliability components of the PDM checklist, whereas trustworthiness showed a weaker association. Failing students consistently scored poorly across all checklist components and RFP, with approximately half or fewer meeting individual checklist requirements. Qualitative analysis of nine examiners’ interviews produced a schema of What, How, and Why: What assessors viewed as RFP was the integration of clinical competence, safety, scope awareness, reasoning, and team readiness; How RFP was judged was through behaviours such as supervision-seeking, recognising unwell patients, attitudinal maturity, and structured consultations; Why RFP judgments were used included: to assess socio-relational skills, address workplace limitations, and make decisions, particularly on borderline performances. Readiness for practice is a complex, multi-dimensional construct that includes application of knowledge, technical skills, reliability, professional identity, safety and trustworthiness. While this study does not directly evaluate examiner training, understanding how examiners apply RFP frameworks may inform future efforts to enhance training consistency, fairness, and assessment utility.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Education
Published
2026-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09126-6
Primary Topic
Innovations in Medical Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Operationalising readiness for practice in final OSCEs: insights from a mixed-methods study across five Australian medical schools

Shannon Saad, Bunmi S. Malau‐Aduli, Karen D’Souza, Jane Smith et al.
BMC Medical Education
Innovations in Medical Education
article

Operationalising readiness for practice in final OSCEs: insights from a mixed-methods study across five Australian medical schools

Shannon Saad, Bunmi S. Malau‐Aduli, Karen D’Souza, Jane Smith, Richard Hays, Bradley Williams
article en

Abstract

Readiness for practice (RFP) is a critical outcome for medical education, reflecting a graduate’s ability to transition from student to clinician. Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) play a pivotal role in evaluating RFP. This study aimed to investigate the conceptualisation and operationalisation of RFP within the OSCE context and evaluate the contribution of a newly developed RFP-focused rating tool compared to traditional OSCE scoring. Utilising a sequential explanatory mixed-methods approach, this study was conducted across five Australian medical schools. Quantitative data from final-year medical students’ OSCE results were analysed to examine correlations between RFP scores and components of a 5-item Process of Decision-Making (PDM) checklist: safety, reliability, trustworthiness, insight, and an organised/logical approach. In the qualitative phase, semi-structured interviews with OSCE examiners were analysed using inductive thematic analysis to explore their perceptions of RFP and decision-making processes. Quantitative analyses of 550 medical students’ OSCE performance datasets revealed that global rating had the strongest correlation with RFP scores, followed by safety and reliability components of the PDM checklist, whereas trustworthiness showed a weaker association. Failing students consistently scored poorly across all checklist components and RFP, with approximately half or fewer meeting individual checklist requirements. Qualitative analysis of nine examiners’ interviews produced a schema of What, How, and Why: What assessors viewed as RFP was the integration of clinical competence, safety, scope awareness, reasoning, and team readiness; How RFP was judged was through behaviours such as supervision-seeking, recognising unwell patients, attitudinal maturity, and structured consultations; Why RFP judgments were used included: to assess socio-relational skills, address workplace limitations, and make decisions, particularly on borderline performances. Readiness for practice is a complex, multi-dimensional construct that includes application of knowledge, technical skills, reliability, professional identity, safety and trustworthiness. While this study does not directly evaluate examiner training, understanding how examiners apply RFP frameworks may inform future efforts to enhance training consistency, fairness, and assessment utility.

BMC Medical Education
Bond University (AU), University of Tasmania (AU), Deakin University (AU), University of Newcastle Australia (AU), James Cook University (AU), The University of Notre Dame Australia (AU)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Innovations in Medical Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.