ArticleGMS journal for medical education2022
Essential steps in the development, implementation, evaluation and quality assurance of the written part of the Swiss federal licensing examination for human medicine.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This report describes the essential steps in the development, implementation, evaluation and quality assurance of the written part of the Swiss Federal Licensing Examination for Human Medicine (FLE) and the insights gained since its introduction in 2011. Methods: Based on existing scientific evidence, international expertise, and experience gained from previous examinations, the FLE is developed by experts from all five medical faculties in Switzerland with the support of the Institute for Medical Education and is held simultaneously at five locations. The exam organisers document and review every examination held and continuously optimise the processes; they have summarised the results in this report. Results: The essential steps comprise the development, revision and translation of questions; construction of the exam and production of materials; candidate preparation; implementation and analysis. The quality assurance measures consist of guideline coherence in the development of the questions and implementation of the exam, revision processes, construction of the exam based on the national blueprint, multiphase review of the translations and exam material, and statistical analysis of the exam and the comments from candidates. The intensive collaboration, especially on the part of representatives from all the participating faculties and a central coordination unit, which provides methodological support throughout and oversees the analysis of the exam, has proven successful. Successfully completed examinations and reliable results in the eleven examinations so far implemented represent the outcomes of the quality assurance measures. Significant insights in recent years are the importance of appreciating the work of those involved and the central organisation of exam development, thus ensuring the long-term success of the process. Conclusion: Common guidelines and workshops, quality assurance measures accompanied by the continuous improvement of all processes, and appreciation of everyone involved, are essential to carrying out such an examination at a high-quality level in the long term.
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.