ArticleGMS journal for medical education2024
Position statement of the GMA committee "teaching evaluation".
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Towards a standardized competency-profile for peer-to-peer-teachers in medical education - a systematic mapping review.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Comparing the Weighted Gain Score and a Rasch-Based Approach for Estimating Learning Outcomes in Medical Education: Quantitative Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Strategy-based evaluation of a formative simulation test assessing professionally relevant competences of undergraduate medical students.GMS journal for medical education · 2025Article
- Interprofessional education in medicine.GMS journal for 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evaluation of teaching can be an essential driver for curriculum development. Instruments for teaching evaluation are not only used for the purpose of quality assurance but also in the context of medical education research. Therefore, they must meet the common requirements for reliability and validity. This position paper from the GMA Teaching Evaluation Committee discusses strategic and methodological aspects of evaluation in the context of undergraduate medical education and related courses; and formulates recommendations for the further development of evaluation. First, a four-step approach to the design and implementation of evaluations is presented, then methodological and practical aspects are discussed in more detail. The focus here is on target and confounding variables, survey instruments as well as aspects of implementation and data protection. Finally, possible consequences from evaluation data for the four dimensions of teaching quality (structural and procedural aspects, teachers and outcomes) are discussed.
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.