Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The advantages of the objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) in assessing the skills of nursing students have been recognized, but still contested. This systematic review aimed to compare and contrast OSCE use across countries as a simulation assessment tool incorporating perspectives of nursing students. A systematic literature was conducted utilizing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). The databases that were featured are EBSCO, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, and PubMed from 2017 to 2022. The Mixed Method Assessment Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of the studies. The National Health and Medical Research Council's standards were also used to evaluate quantitative studies. There were 182 articles found in a literature search. A total of 18 articles met the inclusion criteria. Students reported that the OSCA is well-structured, sequential, and covers a wide range of knowledge and skills. Despite the fact that it is stressful, expensive, and requires more time for preparation and implantation, many still prefer it because of its benefits This review can conclude that students exhibited favorable perspectives toward using OSCE, contributing to the development of clinical skills, and increasing self-confidence in their knowledge. Conducting more research related to the comparison of OSCE to clinical practice scores outcomes is advised and strategies for lowering stress and cost exam are recommended.
Maysa Fareed Kassabry (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: