Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36276764›Full record

ArticleMedical science educator2022

Assessment for Learning with Ungraded and Graded Assessments.

Karly A Pippitt, Kathryn B Moore, Janet E Lindsley, Paloma F Cariello, Andrew G Smith, Tim Formosa, Karen Moser, David A Morton, Jorie M Colbert-Getz, Candace J Chow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical science educator, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Karly A PippittDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, 317 Chipeta Way, Suite A, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0596-5907
Kathryn B MooreDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6993-152X
Janet E LindsleyDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5318-8268
Paloma F CarielloDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4347-4321
Andrew G SmithDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5775-6509
Tim FormosaDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8477-2483
Karen MoserDepartment of Pathology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2258-4444
David A MortonDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1455-3840
Jorie M Colbert-GetzDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7419-7588
Candace J ChowDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7939-7930

Funding

Utah Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR002538 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI HESS, RACHEL, MAJERSIK, JENNIFER JUHL · 2018 to 2022
$26.0M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002538
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Assessment for learning has many benefits, but learners will still encounter high-stakes decisions about their performance throughout training. It is unknown if assessment for learning can be promoted with a combination model where scores from some assessments are factored into course grades and scores from other assessments are not used for course grading. Methods: At the University of Utah School of Medicine, year 1-2 medical students (MS) completed multiple-choice question quiz assessments and final examinations in six systems-based science courses. Quiz and final examination performance counted toward course grades for MS2017-MS2018. Starting with the MS2020 cohort, quizzes no longer counted toward course grades. Quiz, final examination, and Step 1 scores were compared between ungraded quiz and graded quiz cohorts with independent samples Results: Quiz performance was not different for the ungraded and graded cohorts ( Discussion: The change to ungraded quizzes did not negatively affect final examination or Step 1 performance, suggesting a combination of ungraded and graded assessments can effectively promote assessment for learning.

Indexed as

AssessmentPerformancePreclinicalUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID36276764
PMCPMC9584017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.