Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31696439›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on medical education2019

Guidelines: The dos, don'ts and don't knows of remediation in medical education.

Calvin L Chou, Adina Kalet, Manuel Joao Costa, Jennifer Cleland, Kalman Winston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The stigma of underperformance in assessment and remediation.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Curricular changes in times of crisis: Lessons learned.Currents in pharmacy teaching & learning · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Calvin L ChouDepartment of Medicine, University of California and Veterans Affairs Healthcare System, San Francisco, CA, USA. calvin.chou@ucsf.edu.
Adina KaletDepartment of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.
Manuel Joao CostaLife and Health Sciences Research Institute, School of Medicine, University of Minho, Minho, Portugal.
Jennifer ClelandCentre for Healthcare Education Research and Innovation (CHERI), University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Kalman WinstonDepartment of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge University, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTwo developing forces have achieved prominence in medical education: the advent of competency-based assessments and a growing commitment to expand access to medicine for a broader range of learners with a wider array of preparation. Remediation is intended to support all learners to achieve sufficient competence. Therefore, it is timely to provide practical guidelines for remediation in medical education that clarify best practices, practices to avoid, and areas requiring further research, in order to guide work with both individual struggling learners and development of training program policies.

methodsCollectively, we generated an initial list of Do's, Don'ts, and Don't Knows for remediation in medical education, which was then iteratively refined through discussions and additional evidence-gathering. The final guidelines were then graded for the strength of the evidence by consensus.

resultsWe present 26 guidelines: two groupings of Do's (systems-level interventions and recommendations for individual learners), along with short lists of Don'ts and Don't Knows, and our interpretation of the strength of current evidence for each guideline.

conclusionsRemediation is a high-stakes, highly complex process involving learners, faculty, systems, and societal factors. Our synthesis resulted in a list of guidelines that summarize the current state of educational theory and empirical evidence that can improve remediation processes at individual and institutional levels. Important unanswered questions remain; ongoing research can further improve remediation practices to ensure the appropriate support for learners, institutions, and society.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalGuidelines as TopicHumansProfessional CompetenceRemedial TeachingAt-risk studentsFeedbackRemediationStruggling learner

Identifiers

PMID31696439
PMCPMC6904411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.