Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36476483›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2022

Medical students' perception of changes in assessments implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Francesca Bladt, Prakriti Khanal, Anusha Mahesh Prabhu, Elizabeth Hauke, Martyn Kingsbury, Sohag Nafis Saleh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 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
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francesca Bladt *Imperial College School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Prakriti Khanal *Imperial College School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Anusha Mahesh Prabhu *Imperial College School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Elizabeth HaukeCentre for Languages, Culture, and Communication, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Martyn KingsburyCentre for Higher Education Research, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Sohag Nafis SalehImperial College School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK. s.saleh@imperial.ac.uk.
Imperial College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCOVID-19 posed many challenges to medical education in the United Kingdom (UK). This includes implementing assessments during 4 months of national lockdowns within a 2-year period, where in-person education was prohibited. This study aimed to identify medical school assessment formats emerging during COVID-19 restrictions, investigate medical students' perspectives on these and identify influencing factors.

methodsThe study consisted of two phases: a questionnaire asking medical students about assessment changes they experienced, satisfaction with these changes and preference regarding different assessments that emerged. The second phase involved semi-structured interviews with medical students across the UK to provide a deeper contextualized understanding of the complex factors influencing their perspectives.

resultsIn the questionnaire responses, open-book assessments had the highest satisfaction, and were the preferred option indicated. Furthermore, in the case of assessment cancellation, an increase in weighting of future assessments was preferred over increase in weighting of past assessments. Students were also satisfied with formative or pass-fail assessments. Interview analyses indicate that although cancellation or replacement of summative assessments with formative assessments reduced heightened anxiety from additional COVID-19 stressors, students worried about possible future knowledge gaps resulting from reduced motivation for assessment-related study. Students' satisfaction level was also affected by timeliness of communication from universities regarding changes, and student involvement in the decision-making processes. Perceived fairness and standardisation of test-taking conditions were ranked as the most important factors influencing student satisfaction, followed closely by familiarity with the format. In contrast, technical issues, lack of transparency about changes, perceived unfairness around invigilation, and uncertainty around changes in assessment format and weighting contributed to dissatisfaction.

conclusionsOnline open-book assessments were seen as the most ideal amongst all participants, and students who experienced these were the most satisfied with their assessment change. They were perceived as most fair and authentic compared to real-life medical training. We seek to inform educators about student perceptions of successful assessment strategies under COVID-19 restrictions and provide evidence to allow debate on ongoing assessment reform and innovation. While this work looks specifically at assessment changes during COVID-19, understanding factors affecting student perception of assessment is applicable to examinations beyond COVID-19.

Indexed as

COVID-19Students, MedicalCommunicable Disease ControlHumansPandemicsPerceptionSchools, MedicalAssessmentCOVID-19ExaminationsMedical educationMedical studentsOnline examinationOpen-bookProctoringSupervised

Identifiers

PMID36476483
PMCPMC9727955
OpenAlexW4311574910

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.