. 2017 Jan 1;3(1):9–16. doi: 10.1136/bmjstel-2016-000125

Table 1.

ICCs between expert debriefing evaluators, debriefers and learners evaluations across OSAD elements

OSAD element	Learners and debriefers	Learners and expert debriefing evaluators	Debriefers and debriefing expert evaluators
Approach	0.15^NS	0.28*	0.12^NS
Learning environment	0.20*	0.01^NS	0.01^NS
Learner engagement	0.23^NS	0.45**	0.22^NS
Reaction	0.13^NS	0.03NS	−0.10^NS
Reflection	0.14^NS	0.43**	0.35**
Analysis	0.14^NS	0.21*	0.14^NS
Diagnosis	0.11^NS	0.26*	−0.02^NS
Application	0.40**	0.18^NS	0.16^NS

*p<0.05; **p<0.01.

ICC interpretation: lack of agreement 0.00–0.30; weak agreement 0.31–0.50; moderate agreement 0.51–0.70; strong agreement 0.71–0.90; very strong agreement 0.91–1.00 (LeBreton and Senter).¹⁶

ICC, intraclass correlation; NS, not statistically significant; OSAD, Objective Structured Assessment of Debriefing.