PMID- 31636820
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20200316
LR  - 20220410
IS  - 1949-8357 (Electronic)
IS  - 1949-8349 (Print)
IS  - 1949-8357 (Linking)
VI  - 11
IP  - 5
DP  - 2019 Oct
TI  - A Validity Study of COMLEX-USA Level 2-CE and COMAT Clinical Subjects: Concurrent 
      and Predictive Evidence.
PG  - 521-526
LID - 10.4300/JGME-D-19-00157.1 [doi]
AB  - BACKGROUND: The Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensure Examination 
      (COMLEX-USA) Level 2-Cognitive Examination (CE) and the Comprehensive Osteopathic 
      Medical Achievement Test (COMAT) are administered to similar populations (third- 
      and fourth-year osteopathic students) at similar points in time. Examining the 
      relationship between scores on the 2 assessments that measure similar constructs 
      ultimately supports the validity of both. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is 
      to provide empirical evidence of the concurrent and predictive validity of COMAT 
      and COMLEX-USA Level 2-CE. METHODS: In 2018, first-attempt scores on Level 2-CE 
      were aggregated from June 2015 to May 2018 and matched with first-attempt scores 
      on each COMAT clinical subject. We conducted correlational analyses between 
      performance on COMAT and Level 2-CE, and COMAT scores and Level 2-CE discipline 
      subscores. Additionally, we used multivariate regression to analyze the 
      predictive relationship between performance on all COMAT clinical subjects and 
      Level 2-CE. RESULTS: The results from correlational analyses indicated 
      statistically significant, positive associations between COMAT and Level 2-CE 
      scores (r = 0.49-0.68, P < .0001), and statistically significant, but slightly 
      weaker relationships between COMAT scores and Level 2-CE discipline subscores (r 
      = 0.31-0.60, P < .0001). Furthermore, results from the multiple regression 
      indicated that scores on COMAT explained 68% of the variance in Level 2-CE 
      scores, and that COMAT internal medicine and emergency medicine were weighted 
      more heavily than other specialties. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study 
      can inform assessment practices by supporting the use of COMAT for osteopathic 
      medical schools that do not administer COMAT.
CI  - Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education 2019.
FAU - Hudson, Kimberly M
AU  - Hudson KM
FAU - Tsai, Tsung-Hsun
AU  - Tsai TH
FAU - Finch, Charles
AU  - Finch C
FAU - Dickerman, Joel L
AU  - Dickerman JL
FAU - Liu, Silu
AU  - Liu S
FAU - Shen, Ling
AU  - Shen L
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Validation Study
PL  - United States
TA  - J Grad Med Educ
JT  - Journal of graduate medical education
JID - 101521733
SB  - IM
CIN - J Grad Med Educ. 2019 Oct;11(5):527-529. PMID: 31636821
MH  - Educational Measurement/*methods
MH  - Humans
MH  - Licensure, Medical
MH  - Osteopathic Medicine/*education
MH  - Students, Medical/*statistics & numerical data
PMC - PMC6795332
COIS- Conflict of interest: Five of the 6 authors were employed by the National Board 
      of Osteopathic Medical Examiners at the time this study was conducted.
EDAT- 2019/10/23 06:00
MHDA- 2020/03/17 06:00
PMCR- 2020/10/01
CRDT- 2019/10/23 06:00
PHST- 2019/02/28 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2019/08/11 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2019/08/12 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2019/10/23 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2019/10/23 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2020/03/17 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2020/10/01 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - JGME-D-19-00157R1 [pii]
AID - 10.4300/JGME-D-19-00157.1 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - J Grad Med Educ. 2019 Oct;11(5):521-526. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-19-00157.1.