ArticleClinical medicine (London, England)2017
The predictive validity of a situational judgement test, a clinical problem solving test and the core medical training selection methods for performance in specialty training .
Article in Clinical medicine (London, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of a School Intervention Based on Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice of Soil-Transmitted Helminths.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2024Trial
- Predicting general practice trainee summative fellowship exam performance using commencement-of-training formative assessments: a retrospective cohort study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- What is the predictive validity of clinical placement sign-off forms for medical students?BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Use of Situational Judgment Tests to Teach Empathy, Assertiveness, Communication, and Ethics.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2022Article
- Development and testing of the situational judgement test to measure safety performance of healthcare professionals: An explorative cross-sectional study.Nursing open · 2022Article
- Evaluation of a Situational Judgement Test to Develop Non-Academic Skills in Pharmacy Students.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2019Article
- Evaluating the validity of the selection measures used for the UK's foundation medical training programme: a national cohort study.BMJ open · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to follow up a sample of physicians who began core medical training (CMT) in 2009. This paper examines the long-term validity of CMT and GP selection methods in predicting performance in the Membership of Royal College of Physicians (MRCP(UK)) examinations. We performed a longitudinal study, examining the extent to which the GP and CMT selection methods (T1) predict performance in the MRCP(UK) examinations (T2). A total of 2,569 applicants from 2008-09 who completed CMT and GP selection methods were included in the study. Looking at MRCP(UK) part 1, part 2 written and PACES scores, both CMT and GP selection methods show evidence of predictive validity for the outcome variables, and hierarchical regressions show the GP methods add significant value to the CMT selection process. CMT selection methods predict performance in important outcomes and have good evidence of validity; the GP methods may have an additional role alongside the CMT selection methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.