Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33563627›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Formative peer assessment in higher healthcare education programmes: a scoping review.

Marie Stenberg, Elisabeth Mangrio, Mariette Bengtsson, Elisabeth Carlson

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A Multilayered Approach to Professionalism Assessment in Physician Assistant Education: Tracking Growth Beyond Zero-Tolerance Policies.The journal of physician assistant education : the official journal of the Physician Assistant Education Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marie StenbergDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-0749-5718
Elisabeth MangrioDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Mariette BengtssonDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Elisabeth CarlsonDepartment of Care Science, Faculty of Health and Society, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden elisabeth.carlson@mau.se.ORCID 0000-0003-0077-9061
Malmö University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesFormative peer assessment focuses on learning and development of the student learning process. This implies that students are taking responsibility for assessing the work of their peers by giving and receiving feedback to each other. The aim was to compile research about formative peer assessment presented in higher healthcare education, focusing on the rationale, the interventions, the experiences of students and teachers and the outcomes of formative assessment interventions.

designA scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted until May 2019 in PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Education Research Complete and Education Research Centre. Grey literature was searched in Library Search, Google Scholar and Science Direct. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Studies addressing formative peer assessment in higher education, focusing on medicine, nursing, midwifery, dentistry, physical or occupational therapy and radiology published in peer-reviewed articles or in grey literature. DATA EXTRACTIONS AND SYNTHESIS: Out of 1452 studies, 37 met the inclusion criteria and were critically appraised using relevant Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, Joanna Briggs Institute and Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool tools. The pertinent data were analysed using thematic analysis.

resultThe critical appraisal resulted in 18 included studies with high and moderate quality. The rationale for using formative peer assessment relates to giving and receiving constructive feedback as a means to promote learning. The experience and outcome of formative peer assessment interventions from the perspective of students and teachers are presented within three themes: (1) organisation and structure of the formative peer assessment activities, (2) personal attributes and consequences for oneself and relationships and (3) experience and outcome of feedback and learning.

conclusionHealthcare education must consider preparing and introducing students to collaborative learning, and thus develop well-designed learning activities aligned with the learning outcomes. Since peer collaboration seems to affect students' and teachers' experiences of formative peer assessment, empirical investigations exploring collaboration between students are of utmost importance.

Indexed as

LearningPeer GroupClinical CompetenceDelivery of Health CareFormative FeedbackHumanseducation & training (see medical education & training)medical education & trainingquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID33563627
PMCPMC7875268
OpenAlexW3126225802

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.