Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34558107›Full record

ArticleMedical education2022

Inferring signs from purposeful samples: The role of context in competency assessment.

Marise Ph Born, Karen M Stegers-Jager, Chantal E E van Andel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Marise Ph BornDepartment of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Karen M Stegers-JagerInstitute of Medical Education Research Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2947-6099
Chantal E E van AndelInstitute of Medical Education Research Rotterdam, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5651-3129

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextMedical students' clinical competencies are customarily assessed using convenience samples of performance from real practice. The question is how these convenience samples can be turned into purposeful samples to extrapolate students' overall competency profile at the end of medical school, particularly given the context specificity of clinical performance. In this paper, we will address this issue of inferring signs from samples using insights from the discipline of psychology. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE: We adapted Smith's theory of predictor validity of universals, occupationals and relationals to the context of clinical competency assessment. Universals are characteristics required by all working individuals and therefore not context dependent. Occupationals refer to characteristics required by certain jobs but not others and therefore are dependent on task-related features of an occupation. Relationals are required in a specific organisational context with habitual ways of working together. APPLICATION: Through seven propositions, we assert that generalising from samples of assessed clinical competencies during clerkships to generic competencies (i.e., signs) is dependent on whether characteristics are universals, occupationals and relationals, with universals most and relationals least generalisable.

conclusionWhen determining what types of ratings to use to evaluate medical student competence, medical education has shown too little nuance in considering the degree to which particular characteristics are likely to be generalisable, approaching the issue in an all-or-none manner. Smith's distinction between universals, occupationals and relationals offers a promising way forward that has implications for assessment, student selection and career choice.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalStudents, MedicalClinical CompetenceHumansMedical History TakingSchools, Medical

Identifiers

PMID34558107
PMCPMC9293475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.