
Background & Aims: An oral examination is an essential tool of assessment of depth of knowledge and the communication skill of medical students. There are many shortcomings like examiner bias, improper time distribution, gender bias, and many more. Therefore, in the present study we structured oral examination as an assessment tool for Phase -I Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) students in Biochemistry, along with the examiner’s feedback to abate biases. Materials & Methods: Structural viva voce (SVV) was implemented during 2nd formative assessment, in the Department of Biochemistry. 150 participants (146 students & 4 faculties/ examiners) were contributed. Participants were sensitized and trained about SVV. All the participants were simultaneously assessed with traditional and structured oral examination without intermixing. Feedback form (based on 4-point Likert scale) via a Google form was collected for both types of the viva, from the participants.. Apposite statistical analysis was done. Results: Analysis of the study depicted the optimistic response of the participant towards the SVV. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.00001) were observed in the marks obtained, stress, time allotment, etc. Examiners also acknowledged that SVV was a better way of taking the oral examination as it reduced the bias and brings uniformity of questions. Conclusion: Although before implementing any new tool in assessment, it is necessary to develop the infrastructure accordingly, sensitization and training of the participants and and preparation of the module prior to the examination, but the results of the current study indicated that SVV should be tried in other subjects of medical education and with the majority of medical colleges of other states.
traditional viva voce, examiners, students, R, Medicine, oral examination, structured viva voce
traditional viva voce, examiners, students, R, Medicine, oral examination, structured viva voce
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
