---
title: "OSCE software requirements: a checklist you can put in a tender"
description: "32 OSCE software requirements grouped by stage of the exam cycle, plus vendor questions that distinguish a scheduler from a platform."
canonical: https://studydrome.com/docs/osce/toolkit/osce-software-requirements-checklist/
updated: 2026-10-10
---

# OSCE software requirements: a checklist you can put in a tender

32 OSCE software requirements grouped by stage of the exam cycle, plus vendor questions that distinguish a scheduler from a platform.

This is the requirements list, not the buying advice. Copy the four blocks below into a tender document or a scoring sheet and ask each vendor to answer line by line. The reasoning behind the choice and how to run the process are in "How to Choose OSCE Software." This page is the artifact that the guide sends you to get.

The list is grouped by stage of the exam cycle, because that is how the gaps appear. Most products handle one or two stages well. The stage a school discovers late is the last one, after the marks are in.

## Blueprint and station bank

- [ ] Hold stations in a bank with categories and tags.
- [ ] Map every station to a blueprint domain and report the coverage.
- [ ] Import stations from a spreadsheet without retyping them.
- [ ] Keep a version history per station, showing who changed what.
- [ ] Restrict who can view, edit or approve each bank.
- [ ] Store the candidate brief, examiner brief and equipment list with the station.
- [ ] Support a scale shared across items, or a scale set per item.
- [ ] Flag one item as the global rating and any item as critical.

## Scheduling and exam day

- [ ] Build a circuit from stations, including rest stations.
- [ ] Generate a rotation timetable for candidates, examiners, and rooms.
- [ ] Print the exam-day pack: run sheet, signage, rotation and marking sheets.
- [ ] Check candidates in against the roster on the day.
- [ ] Show a live view of which stations have started and finished.
- [ ] Let a supervisor reopen or extend a session and record the reason.
- [ ] Handle a candidate who arrives late or leaves mid-circuit.
- [ ] Keep working through a connection drop and sync afterward.

## Marking and standard setting

- [ ] Show one examiner one station on one screen.
- [ ] Require a mark on every item before a session can be finished.
- [ ] Record free-text comments alongside the item scores.
- [ ] Apply the critical-item rule at the threshold you set.
- [ ] Run borderline regression, borderline group and Angoff on real data.
- [ ] Let you set or lock a pass mark for a single station.
- [ ] Apply a minimum number of stations passed alongside the total.
- [ ] Show the regression output, not only the resulting cut score.

## Analysis, results and feedback

- [ ] Compute facility, discrimination and item-total correlation per item.
- [ ] Report reliability for each station and for the exam.
- [ ] Compare examiners on leniency and agreement where the design allows.
- [ ] Produce a per-candidate record with items, comments and the result.
- [ ] Control when results become visible, and to whom.
- [ ] Send feedback to candidates and log what each one received.
- [ ] Export every report to a spreadsheet and to PDF.
- [ ] Keep an audit trail of who changed a score or a result.

## The requirement schools forget

Line two of the marking block appears to be a detail. It is the strongest finding in this area. In the Swiss Federal Licensing Examination, 377 examiners across five faculties marked on paper and on screen. On paper, 14.2 percent of 1,428 checklists returned at least one missing rating. On screen, where completion was required before a sheet could be submitted, there were none. Examiner preference for the electronic form rose from 54.5 percent in the first year to 89.8 percent in the second.

A missed rating is not a small problem. It removes a candidate from that item's denominator, which moves the station statistics and can move a borderline decision. The mechanism that fixes it is a screen that refuses an incomplete sheet, which is why the requirement is worded as a refusal rather than a reminder.

A second finding is worth putting in the tender. In a comparison of tablet and paper marking, the share of encounters carrying an examiner comment rose from 41 percent to 51 percent, and the increase was largest for borderline candidates, who are exactly the ones whose feedback matters most.

## Questions to ask the vendor

| Ask this | Why it matters | What a good answer sounds like |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Show me the item analysis from a real sitting. | Separates a scheduling tool from an assessment platform. | A live report with facility, discrimination, and reliability, not a slide. |
| Which standard-setting methods run inside the product? | If none do, you will export every exam to a spreadsheet. | Named methods, run on the exam data, with the output shown. |
| What happens when the network drops mid-station? | Exam day is the only day this question gets answered. | Marking continues on the device and syncs when the link returns. |
| Can we get every score out, per item, per candidate? | You need the raw data for your own analysis and your archive. | A per-item export in a spreadsheet format, available the same day. |
| Who can change a score after marking closes, and is it logged? | Boards are asked this during accreditation reviews. | A named role, a reason field, and a record that cannot be edited. |
| How are results released to candidates? | Release is a policy decision that the product must adhere to. | A visibility control the exam office sets, not an automatic email. |

## What the checklist deliberately leaves out

It says nothing about hosting, price or contract length. Those belong in the commercial section of your tender, and they differ too much between schools to template. It also says nothing about what the software should look like. Examiners judge that in ten minutes at a pilot, and their verdict is worth more than a row in a scoring sheet.

## Frequently asked questions

### Can we run an OSCE without dedicated software?

Yes, and many schools do. Paper marking works, and the free calculators cover the statistics. What you take on is transcription, the missed-rating rate described above, and a results timeline measured in weeks. Software buys back time and removes one error class. It does not make the exam valid.

### How many of these 32 requirements are essential?

Score them rather than count them. The marking block and the analysis block are where exams fail, so weight those. A product that covers the bank and the timetable but exports nothing useful after the exam leaves you where you started.

### What is the difference between a scheduler and an assessment platform?

A scheduler builds the circuit and prints the timetable. An assessment platform also collects the marks, applies the standard and computes the statistics. Both are useful. Only one produces the evidence your quality report needs.

### Should we ask for a pilot before signing?

Yes, with your own station and your own examiners. A demonstration shows the product working on data designed for it. A pilot shows it working on yours, which is the only question that matters.

### Who should own this checklist internally?

The exam office, with the clinical lead signing off the marking and standard-setting blocks and the data protection officer reading the audit and export lines. A tender answered by one person alone tends to score highly on the stage that person knows.

**Sources**

1. [Wagner FL, Feller S, Schmitz FM, et al. Usability and preference of electronic vs. paper and pencil OSCE checklists by examiners and influence of checklist type on missed ratings in the Swiss Federal Licensing Exam](https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001545) (GMS Journal for Medical Education, 2022)
2. [Denison A, Bate E, Thompson J. Tablet versus paper marking in assessment: feedback matters](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-016-0262-8) (Perspectives on Medical Education, 2016)
3. [Hochlehnert A, Schultz JH, Möltner A, et al. Electronic acquisition of OSCE performance using tablets](https://doi.org/10.3205/zma000983) (GMS Zeitschrift für Medizinische Ausbildung, 2015)
4. [Khan KZ, Gaunt K, Ramachandran S, Pushkar P. The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE): AMEE Guide No. 81. Part II: organisation and administration](https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2013.818635) (Medical Teacher, 2013)

> [!NOTE]
> **Book a pilot**
> The fastest way to answer 32 requirements is to watch a product answer them on your own station. Bring one station file and a handful of examiners. Start at /register/.