Table 4. Validity, reliability, and feasibility of DOPS assessment method .

Author year	Country	Participants	Validity	Reliability	Feasibility
Asadi K, et al., 2012(23)	Iran	70 orthopedic interns	CVI:0.90	0.80	-
Wilkinson J, et al., 2008(30)	UK	177 medical specialists	DOPS has low validity.	DOPS reliability can be favorably compared with the mini-CEX and MSF.	Mean time for observation in DOPS varied based on the procedure.
Watson MJ, et al., 2014(43)	Australia	Trainees in ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia (30 video-recorded)	‘Total score’ correlating with trainee experience (r = 0.51, p = 0.004)	Inter-rater: ICC = 0.25 internal consistency: (r = 0.68, p < 0.001)	The mean time taken to complete assessments was 6 minutes and 35 seconds
Hengameh H, et al., 2015 (40)	Iran	Nursing students	CVR: 0.62 CVI:0.79	Kappa coefficient:0.6 ICC: 0.5	-
Barton JP, et al., 2012(44)	UK	157 senior endoscopists —111 candidates and 42 assessors	Most of the candidates (73.6%) and assessors (88.1%) pointed out that DOPS assessment method was valid or very valid.	G: 0.81	Scores of DOPS were highly correlated with assessment score of global experts.
Amini A, et al., 2015(33)	Iran	Seven orthopedic residents and 9 faculty members	CVI: 0.95	ICC:0.85
Delfino AE, et al., 2013	UK	Six anesthesia staff for interviews, 10 anesthesiologists for consensus survey, and 31 anesthesia residents.	CVI: 0.9 kappa values: 0.8	G coefficient:0.90
Sahebalzamani M, et al., 2012	Iran	55 nursing students	Correlation for theoretical: 0.117; correlation for clinical: 0.376	Cronbach alpha coefficient: 94 %
Kuhpayehzade J, et al., 2014(45)	Iran	44 midwifery students	CVR: 0.75 CVI:0.50	Alpha coefficient: 0.81