ArticleMedical education2022
Situational judgement test performance and subsequent misconduct in medical students.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment and evaluation of prescribing competences: A systematic review and recommendations.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Beyond academic metrics-Integrating situational judgment testing in ophthalmology fellowship selection.Indian journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Exploring sensitive topics in assessment research through vignette-based interviewing.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Situational judgement testing at different stages of undergraduate medical training and the risk of professionalism lapses: A cohort study.Medical education · 2026Article
- PREview scores and applicant conduct indicators: distinguishing current professional readiness from historical events.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Does academic excellence predict non-cognitive competencies? Insights from a situational judgement test among medical students in Nigeria.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Evidence-based appraisal of the role of SJTs in selection.Clinical medicine (London, England) · 2023Article
- Assessing professionalism in mental health clinicians: development and validation of a situational judgement test.BJPsych open · 2023Article
- Situational judgement test performance and subsequent misconduct in medical students.Medical education · 2022Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSituational judgement tests (SJTs) have been widely adopted, internationally, into medical selection. It was hoped that such assessments could identify candidates likely to exhibit future professional behaviours. Understanding how performance on such tests may predict the risk of disciplinary action during medical school would provide evidence for the validity of such SJTs within student selection. It would also inform the implementation of such tests within student recruitment.
methodsThis cohort study used data for 6910 medical students from 36 UK medical schools who sat the University Clinical Aptitude Test (UCAT) SJT in 2013. The relationship between SJT scores at application and the risk of subsequent disciplinary action during their studies was modelled. The incremental ability of the SJT scores to predict the risk of disciplinary action, above that already provided by UCAT cognitive test scores and secondary (high) school achievement, was also evaluated in 5535 of the students with information available on this latter metric.
resultsTwo hundred and ten (3.05%) of the students in the cohort experienced disciplinary action. The risk of disciplinary action reduced with increasing performance on the admissions SJT (odds ratio (OR) 0.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.92, p = 0.002). This effect remained similar after adjusting for cognitive performance and prior academic attainment (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92, p = 0.004). The overall estimated effect-size was small (Cohen's d = 0.08) and no evidence of 'threshold' effects were observed for the SJT scores and risk of disciplinary action.
conclusionsPerformance on admissions SJTs can, at least modestly, incrementally predict the risk of subsequent disciplinary action, supporting their use in this context. However, for this SJT and outcome, there did not seem a distinct threshold score above which the risk of disciplinary action disproportionately increased. This should be considered when using the scores within medical selection.
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.