ArticleAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2023
Clinician educators' conceptions of assessment in medical education.
Article in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Theoretical assessment design at a South African school of nursing: A multimethod qualitative exploration.PloS one · 2026Article
- Medical education, reflections and perspectives from South Africa: a review.BMC medical education · 2025Review
- Factors influencing clinician-educators' assessment practice in varied Southern contexts: a health behaviour theory perspective.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2025Article
- Introducing the Research Design of Phenomenography.Medical science educator · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In pursuing assessment excellence, clinician-educators who design and implement assessment are pivotal. The influence of their assessment practice in university-run licensure exams on student learning has direct implications for future patient care. While teaching practice has been shown to parallel conceptions of teaching, we know too little about conceptions of assessment in medical education to know if this is the case for assessment practice and conceptions of assessment. To explore clinician-educators' conceptions of assessment, a phenomenographic study was undertaken. Phenomenography explores conceptions, the qualitatively different ways of understanding a phenomenon. Data analysis identifies a range of hierarchically inclusive categories of understanding, from simple to more complex, and the dimensions that distinguish each category or conception. Thirty-one clerkship convenors in three diverse Southern settings were interviewed in three cycles of iterative data collection and analysis. Four conceptions of assessment were identified: passive operator, awakening enquirer, active owner and scholarly assessor. Six dimensions were elucidated to describe and distinguish each conception: purpose of assessment; temporal perspective; role and responsibility; accountability; reflexivity and emotional valence. Additionally, three characteristics that appeared to track the progressive nature of the conceptions were identified: professional identity, assessment literacy and self-efficacy. These conceptions encompass and extend previously described conceptions across different educational levels, disciplines and contexts, suggesting applicability to other settings. There is some evidence of a relationship between conceptions and practice, suggesting, together with the hierarchical nature of these conceptions, that targeting conceptions during faculty development may be an effective approach to enhance assessment practice.
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.