Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39042360›Full record

ArticleAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2025

Tailoring support following summative assessments: a latent profile analysis of student outcomes across five medical specialities.

Huiming Ding, Matt Homer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Huiming DingSchool of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. H.Ding1@leeds.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5747-7796
Matt HomerSchool of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1161-5938

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Summative assessments are often underused for feedback, despite them being rich with data of students' applied knowledge and clinical and professional skills. To better inform teaching and student support, this study aims to gain insights from summative assessments through profiling students' performance patterns and identify those students missing the basic knowledge and skills in medical specialities essential for their future career. We use Latent Profile Analysis to classify a senior undergraduate year group (n = 295) based on their performance in applied knowledge test (AKT) and OSCE, in which items and stations are pre-classified across five specialities (e.g. Acute and Critical Care, Paediatrics,…). Four distinct groups of students with increasing average performance levels in the AKT, and three such groups in the OSCE are identified. Overall, these two classifications are positively correlated. However, some students do well in one assessment format but not in the other. Importantly, in both the AKT and the OSCE there is a mixed group containing students who have met the required standard to pass, and those who have not. This suggests that a conception of a borderline group at the exam-level can be overly simplistic. There is little literature relating AKT and OSCE performance in this way, and the paper discusses how our analysis gives placement tutors key insights into providing tailored support for distinct student groups needing remediation. It also gives additional information to assessment writers about the performance and difficulty of their assessment items/stations, and to wider faculty about student overall performance and across specialities.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalFemaleHumansMaleAKTFeedbackLatent profile analysisOSCESpecialitiesSummative assessment

Identifiers

PMID39042360
PMCPMC11965220

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.