ReviewCognitive research: principles and implications2023
Cognitive perspectives on maintaining physicians' medical expertise: IV. Best practices and open questions in using testing to enhance learning and retention.
Review in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review of progress test as longitudinal assessment in Saudi Arabia.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- Longitudinal Knowledge Assessment as a driver for learning: insights from a nationwide survey of endocrinologists.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2026Article
- The "Testing Effect" in Undergraduate Endodontic Education: The Impact of Regular Low Stakes Testing on Learning Outcomes and Student Engagement.International endodontic journal · 2026Article
- Assessing the Difficulty and Long-Term Retention of Factual and Conceptual Knowledge Through Multiple-Choice Questions: A Longitudinal Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 2024Article
- Cognitive perspectives on maintaining physicians' medical expertise: V. Using a motivational framework to understand the benefits and costs of testing.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Review
- Cognitive perspectives on maintaining physicians' medical expertise: II. Acquiring, maintaining, and updating cognitive skills.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Review
- Cognitive perspectives on maintaining physicians' medical expertise: I. Reimagining Maintenance of Certification to promote lifelong learning.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although tests and assessments-such as those used to maintain a physician's Board certification-are often viewed merely as tools for decision-making about one's performance level, strong evidence now indicates that the experience of being tested is a powerful learning experience in its own right: The act of retrieving targeted information from memory strengthens the ability to use it again in the future, known as the testing effect. We review meta-analytic evidence for the learning benefits of testing, including in the domain of medicine, and discuss theoretical accounts of its mechanism(s). We also review key moderators-including the timing, frequency, order, and format of testing and the content of feedback-and what they indicate about how to most effectively use testing for learning. We also identify open questions for the optimal use of testing, such as the timing of feedback and the sequencing of complex knowledge domains. Lastly, we consider how to facilitate adoption of this powerful study strategy by physicians and other learners.
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.