ArticleJournal of European CME2022
The European Examination in Core Cardiology in Focus: Evaluation and Recommendations Using Educational Theory.
Article in Journal of European CME, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The development of the European Geriatric Medicine Specialty Exam.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Improved Activity Evaluations: An Iterative Process Using the Rasch Model.The Journal of continuing education in the health professionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The European Examination in Core Cardiology (EECC) is a knowledge-based postgraduate examination for cardiology specialists in Europe. It is designed to assess if a trainee has gained sufficient knowledge for independent specialist practice in core cardiology. A critical evaluation of the ECCC was undertaken using current educational theory. Miller's Pyramid was considered, and the Utility Equation was employed in a mixed methods approach. The utility analysis findings were that the EECC measured well on reliability and validity although improvement could be made in educational impact, cost-effectiveness and accessibility. Recommendations for enhancement were then put forward. No assessment instrument is perfect, and it is important to remember that the EECC is one component of assessment strategy for specialist trainees, complementing other evidence of professional competence. After appraisal, while improvement can be made, the EECC fulfils its ambitions of assessment.
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.