Table 2.

Candidates’ perceptions of web-based structured oral examinations (SOEs).

Candidates’ perceptions of web-based SOEs		Level of agreement (n=542), n (%)
		Agree	Neutral	Disagree
Adequate method of assessment
	The exam adequately tested my clinical reasoning, judgement, insight, and decision-making	396 (73.1)	108 (19.9)	38 (7)
	The case scenarios (examination questions) were appropriate to assess an entry-level specialist or subspecialist	417 (76.9)	92 (16.9)	33 (6.1)
	The total length of the examination was appropriate	364 (67.2)	0 (0)	178 (32.8)
	The average time for each station/case was appropriate	364 (67.2)	0 (0)	178 (32.8)
	Having real patients would have improved the quality of the examination	173 (31.9)	168 (30.9)	201 (37.1)
	It would have been preferable to have a local examiner present with me to ask the questions	152 (28)	157 (28.9)	233 (42.9)
Fair method of assessment
	The use of a larger number of case scenarios rather than the historically smaller number of cases gave me a better chance to show my capability	363 (66.9)	141 (26)	38 (7)
	In my opinion, this was a fair examination	374 (69)	130 (23.9)	38 (7)
Quality of the examination material
	The examination material was clearly presented	369 (68.1)	103 (19)	70 (12.9)