ArticleBMJ open2020
'10% of your medical students will cause 90% of your problems': a prospective correlational study.
Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Situational judgement testing at different stages of undergraduate medical training and the risk of professionalism lapses: A cohort study.Medical education · 2026Article
- Concerns of first-year medical students regarding their future profession: an international study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Evidence-based appraisal of the role of SJTs in selection.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2023Article
- The validity of Engagement and Feedback Assessments (EFAs): identifying students at risk of failing.BMC medical education · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesOur aim was to explore the relationship between medical student Conscientiousness Index scores and indicators of later clinical performance held in the UK Medical Education Database (UKMED). Objectives were to determine whether conscientiousness in first-year and second-year medical students predicts later performance in medical school and in early practice. Policy implications would permit targeted remediation where necessary or aid in selection.
designA prospective correlational study.
settingA single UK medical school and early years of practice, 2005-2018.
participantsThe data were obtained from the UKMED on 858 students. Full outcome data was available for variable numbers of participants, as described in the text.
main outcome measuresScores on the UK Foundation Programme Office's Situational Judgement Test (SJT) and Educational Performance Measure (EPM), the Prescribing Safety Assessment (PSA) and Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP) outcomes.
resultsLinear regression analysis shows Conscientiousness Index scores significantly correlate with pregraduate and postgraduate performance variables: SJT scores (R=0.373, R
conclusionsConscientiousness Index scores in years 1 and 2 of medical school have predictive value for later performance in knowledge, skills and clinical practice. This trait could be used either for selection or for targeted remediation to avoid potential problems in the future.
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.