Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39045346›Full record

ArticleAEM education and training2024

Innovations report: A grading committee for a required fourth-year emergency medicine clerkship.

Meredith Thompson, Megan Rivera, Jeffrey Katz, Nicholas Maldonado, Caroline Srihari, Michael Marchick, Rosemarie Fernandez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in AEM education and training, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Meredith ThompsonDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8528-6823
Megan RiveraDepartment of Emergency Medicine Duke University Durham North Carolina USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-3157-2690
Jeffrey KatzUniversity of Central Florida College of Medicine Orlando Florida USA.
Nicholas MaldonadoDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA.
Caroline SrihariDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA.
Michael MarchickDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA.
Rosemarie FernandezDepartment of Emergency Medicine University of Florida Gainesville Florida USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9588-4424

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Assessment of medical students in the clinical learning environment is fraught with challenges. Seemingly small variations in clinical clerkship evaluation can significantly impact a student's future. As such, the integrity of the grade selection process must be heavily scrutinized. Group decision making in the form of a clerkship grading committee may be part of a solution to address this complex problem. Methods: We conducted a retrospective observational study to describe grading committee decisions for a required fourth-year EM clerkship from August 2021 to April 2022. Literature on best practices for group decision making and assessment were reviewed. This informed the development and implementation of the committee process. Each committee meeting was video recorded and coded for discussion time per student, times the committee grade differed from historical-grade cutoffs with reasoning, and the frequency a committee member voiced a first-hand account of student performance. Results: Data from nine meetings was reviewed (86 students). The mean discussion time per student was 2 min 13 s (range 11 s to 9 min 22 s). The final committee decision differed from historical-grade cutoffs for nine students (10%), six were adjusted above and three below. In 64% (55/86) of student reviews a committee member voiced a first-hand experience of working with the student. Positive grade adjustments were made due to outlier evaluations and negative adjustments were made for professionalism concerns. Conclusions: Grading committees are a means to conduct a comprehensive review of student performance and offer shared ownership of the grade decision among committee members. More study is needed to directly determine their potential benefit and role in clerkship grading.

Identifiers

PMID39045346
PMCPMC11261158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.