Background: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of using the checklist and global rating scores to evaluate the clinical competency of medical students in Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs). Additionally, the study assesses the appropriateness of using the borderline regression method to set standards for small-scale OSCE exams and determines if the estimated passing marks differ significantly from the university's prefixed passing score of 70%. The study also examines whether the university should utilize the borderline regression method to determine passing scores for each OSCE exam instead of a set passing score.Methods: The study analyzed medical students' grades in 11 OSCE exams in the 2022-2023 academic year at Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Students received family medicine clerkship rotations, and after each rotation, they took an OSCE exam consisting of three stations that family medicine consultants graded. The exam included a checklist of 30 tasks and a five-level global rank scale. The study collected all the checklist marks and global rank grades and analyzed them using IBM® Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS® Statistics) software. The statistical tests used were descriptive statistics, the T-test, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact test, and Pearson correlation.Results: The study showed that students were more likely to pass when using the global rating system than the checklist scoring system. Additionally, students had a significantly lower passing rate when using the higher cut-off passing score estimated using the borderline regression method compared to the pre-set passing score of 70% established by the university (with a p-value of 0.00).Conclusion: Each scoring system has advantages and disadvantages, but they complement each other. Combining scoring systems can produce a more comprehensive and precise evaluation of a candidate's performance. The study also emphasizes the importance of carefully selecting and validating cut-off points in OSCE exams to ensure fairness and consistency in assessment.