ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2021
Answering questions in a co-created formative exam question bank improves summative exam performance, while students perceive benefits from answering, authoring, and peer discussion: A mixed methods analysis of PeerWise.
Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Formative feedback to improve pharmacology learning: Proposed principles and guidelines for effective practice.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Guideline
- Reimagining pharmacology education.Pharmacological reviews · 2026Review
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis on the Impact of Peer-Made MCQ Question-Bank Usage on Summative Assessments in Medical Education.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2025Review
- A Near-Peer Mentorship Program that Sustains a Student-Faculty Partnership Co-creating Curriculum-Aligned Formative Multiple-Choice Questions in Preclinical Medical Education.Medical science educator · 2025Article
- Question banks: credit? Or debit? A qualitative exploration of their use among medical students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- A Picture Paints a Thousand Words: Perspectives of the Use of Images and Videos of Physical Findings in Virtual OSCE Teaching Sessions.Advances in medical education and practice · 2024Article
- Answering questions in a co-created formative exam question bank improves summative exam performance, while students perceive benefits from answering, authoring, and peer discussion: A mixed methods analysis of PeerWise.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple choice questions (MCQs) are a common form of assessment in medical schools and students seek opportunities to engage with formative assessment that reflects their summative exams. Formative assessment with feedback and active learning strategies improve student learning outcomes, but a challenge for educators, particularly those with large class sizes, is how to provide students with such opportunities without overburdening faculty. To address this, we enrolled medical students in the online learning platform PeerWise, which enables students to author and answer MCQs, rate the quality of other students' contributions as well as discuss content. A quasi-experimental mixed methods research design was used to explore PeerWise use and its impact on the learning experience and exam results of fourth year medical students who were studying courses in clinical sciences and pharmacology. Most students chose to engage with PeerWise following its introduction as a noncompulsory learning opportunity. While students perceived benefits in authoring and peer discussion, students engaged most highly with answering questions, noting that this helped them identify gaps in knowledge, test their learning and improve exam technique. Detailed analysis of the 2015 cohort (n = 444) with hierarchical regression models revealed a significant positive predictive relationship between answering PeerWise questions and exam results, even after controlling for previous academic performance, which was further confirmed with a follow-up multi-year analysis (2015-2018, n = 1693). These 4 years of quantitative data corroborated students' belief in the benefit of answering peer-authored questions for learning.
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.