Could not download file: This paper is available to authorised users only.


M. Iniesta, J. Viñuela, F. Utrilla, L. Aracil, A. Bascones-Martínez

University Complutense of Madrid (SPAIN)
Medical schools have established programmes to explicitly teach professionalism. It has become apparent during this process that improvements are needed in the assessment of professionalism, and novel methods are being developed. Among these, results of the Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) have been found to correlate well with those of other performance-based assessments. The Mini-CEX format is easy to use, it promotes feedback, and its reliability and validity have been confirmed, with good inter-examiner reliability. It has proven to offer a formative and summative assessment as well as a reliable and valid measure of performance.

- To implement a new method for evaluative exploration more in line with the current goals of the European Higher Education Area.
- To carry out an evaluation that is fairer and more related to the real world and to the profile required by a graduate student.
- To analyze the possible advantages and disadvantages of this type of evaluation.

For performance of the Mini-CEX, each teacher observed the behaviour of a group of students while these conducted a thorough history, examination and/or periodontal treatment during Periodontology clinical practice. At the end of the course, the teacher rated the students and provided feedback. For each encounter, the teacher recorded the date, the complexity of the patient's problem on a 3-point scale (low, moderate or high) and the type of visit (diagnosis, treatment or follow-up). The examiner used a 10-point scale to evaluate the anamnesis, physical examination, clinical judgment, communication skills, professionalism, organization and efficiency, and overall clinical competence of the students. This checklist was adapted to the subject of Periodontology by adding two further areas: ergonomics/posture and manual skills.

The use of the Mini-CEX was found to offer a more objective assessment in comparison to an overall end-of-course rating by the teacher.