Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34916308›Full record

Observational studyBMJ open2021

Predictive validity of A-level grades and teacher-predicted grades in UK medical school applicants: a retrospective analysis of administrative data in a time of COVID-19.

I C McManus, Katherine Woolf, David Harrison, Paul A Tiffin, Lewis W Paton, Kevin Yet Fong Cheung, Daniel T Smith

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genomic medicine for the 21Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

I C McManusResearch Department of Medical Education, UCL Medical School, London, UK i.mcmanus@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3510-4814
Katherine WoolfResearch Department of Medical Education, UCL Medical School, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4915-0715
David HarrisonResearch Department of Medical Education, UCL Medical School, London, UK.
Paul A TiffinDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Lewis W PatonDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3328-5634
Kevin Yet Fong CheungCambridge Assessment, Cambridge, UK.
Daniel T SmithGeneral Medical Council, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1215-5811
London Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education · GBUniversity of York · GBCambridge University Press · GBGeneral Medical Council · GBUniversity College Hospital · GB

Funding

HSRD VA TPP 10-008
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare in UK medical students the predictive validity of attained A-level grades and teacher-predicted A levels for undergraduate and postgraduate outcomes. Teacher-predicted A-level grades are a plausible proxy for the teacher-estimated grades that replaced UK examinations in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The study also models the likely future consequences for UK medical schools of replacing public A-level examination grades with teacher-predicted grades.

designLongitudinal observational study using UK Medical Education Database data.

settingUK medical education and training.

participantsDataset 1: 81 202 medical school applicants in 2010-2018 with predicted and attained A-level grades. Dataset 2: 22 150 18-year-old medical school applicants in 2010-2014 with predicted and attained A-level grades, of whom 12 600 had medical school assessment outcomes and 1340 had postgraduate outcomes available. OUTCOME MEASURES: Undergraduate and postgraduate medical examination results in relation to attained and teacher-predicted A-level results.

resultsDataset 1: teacher-predicted grades were accurate for 48.8% of A levels, overpredicted in 44.7% of cases and underpredicted in 6.5% of cases. Dataset 2: undergraduate and postgraduate outcomes correlated significantly better with attained than with teacher-predicted A-level grades. Modelling suggests that using teacher-estimated grades instead of attained grades will mean that 2020 entrants are more likely to underattain compared with previous years, 13% more gaining the equivalent of the lowest performance decile and 16% fewer reaching the equivalent of the current top decile, with knock-on effects for postgraduate training.

conclusionsThe replacement of attained A-level examination grades with teacher-estimated grades as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic may result in 2020 medical school entrants having somewhat lower academic performance compared with previous years. Medical schools may need to consider additional teaching for entrants who are struggling or who might need extra support for missed aspects of A-level teaching.

Indexed as

COVID-19Education, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalHumansPandemicsRetrospective StudiesSARS-CoV-2School Admission CriteriaSchools, MedicalUnited KingdomCOVID-19education & training (see medical education & training)medical education & training

Identifiers

PMID34916308
PMCPMC8678544
OpenAlexW4200336334

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.