Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33752773›Full record

ArticleBJPsych bulletin2022

Transforming MRCPsych theory examinations: digitisation and very short answer questions (VSAQs).

Karl Scheeres, Niruj Agrawal, Stephanie Ewen, Ian Hall

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BJPsych bulletin, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Karl ScheeresCentre for Health Sciences Education, University of Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5194-2204
Niruj AgrawalSt George's Hospital, UK.
Stephanie EwenSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK.
Ian HallEast London NHS Foundation Trust, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many examinations are now delivered online using digital formats, the migration to which has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The MRCPsych theory examinations have been delivered in this way since Autumn 2020. The multiple choice question formats currently in use are highly reliable, but other formats enabled by the digital platform, such as very short answer questions (VSAQs), may promote deeper learning. Trainees often ask for a focus on core knowledge, and the absence of cueing with VSAQs could help achieve this. This paper describes the background and evidence base for VSAQs, and how they might be introduced. Any new question formats would be thoroughly piloted before appearing in the examinations and are likely to have a phased introduction alongside existing formats.

Indexed as

cost-effectivenessEducation and traininghistory of psychiatryinformation technologiessupervision

Identifiers

PMID33752773
PMCPMC8914921

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.