Comparison of Standard Setting Procedures to Establish Defensible Passing Standards for Clinical Skills Assessment: Angoff, Borderline Group, Contrasting Groups and Patient Safety Methods.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Standard setting methods for clinical skills assessments help establish cut scores that accurately reflect clinical performance expectations. However, these methods lead to varied cut scores, and guidance for method selection is limited. This study compares the application of four methods.

Methods

The Angoff, Patient Safety, Borderline Group and Contrasting Groups methods were applied to an assessment of physical therapist student clinical skills. The resulting cut scores were applied to a de-identified historical dataset (n = 92). Post hoc logistic regression analysis evaluated the underlying constructs for global ratings of student competence.

Results

The cut scores ranged from 65.9% to 86.1%, with the Angoff method resulting in the lowest cut score and

SUBMITTER: Tappan RS 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC12409087 | biostudies-literature | 2025 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature