ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2023
A hitchhikers' guide to the terminology of accreditation processes for health professionals and institutions.
Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2023. 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.
- Accreditation of medical education in Brazil: an evaluation of seventy-six medical schools.BMC medical education · 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accreditation processes for health care professions are designed to ensure that individuals and programs in these fields meet established standards of quality and effectiveness. The accelerating pace of globalization in the health care professions has increased the need for a shared understanding of the vocabulary of evaluation, assessment, and accreditation. The psychometric principles of valid and reliable assessment are commonly accepted, but the terminology is confusing. We believe that all stakeholders - evaluators, faculty, students but also the community - will benefit from a shared language and common set of definitions. We recognize that not all readers will agree with the definitions we propose, but we hope that this guide will help to ensure clarity, consistency, transparency, and fairness, and that it will promote through the stimulation of a debate greater collaboration across national and international boundaries.
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.