Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39185031›Full record

ArticleAEM education and training2024

Decoding competitiveness: Exploring how emergency medicine faculty interpret standardized letters of evaluation.

Caitlin Schrepel, Morgan Sehdev, Nicole M Dubosh, Benjamin H Schnapp, Al'ai Alvarez, Alexis Pelletier-Bui, Cullen Hegarty, Sharon Bord, Eric Shappell

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Caitlin SchrepelUniversity of Washington School of Medicine Seattle Washington USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0204-7657
Morgan SehdevHarvard-Affiliated Emergency Medicine Residency Boston Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2981-0512
Nicole M DuboshBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8674-5334
Benjamin H SchnappUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health Madison Wisconsin USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5031-8269
Al'ai AlvarezStanford University School of Medicine Palo Alto California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5438-2476
Alexis Pelletier-BuiCooper Medical School of Rowan University/Cooper University Hospital Camden New Jersey USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9969-4123
Cullen HegartyUniversity of Minnesota Medical School Minneapolis Minnesota USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7249-8675
Sharon BordThe Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore Maryland USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-5987-4139
Eric ShappellMassachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0281-3219

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Given the importance of the standardized letter of evaluation (SLOE) for application to emergency medicine (EM) residency, it is important that SLOE developers and authors understand how reviewers determine SLOE competitiveness. To inform SLOE design and authorship, the authors set out to build a novel theory to explain how faculty holistically interpret SLOE competitiveness. Methods: The authors used constructivist grounded theory to explore how EM faculty determine SLOE competitiveness. They used purposive sampling to recruit EM faculty participants with at least 1 year of experience in scoring SLOEs. One author conducted hour-long, semistructured interviews over Zoom between August 2023 and March 2024. Two authors iteratively coded the data to develop the initial codebook, organize codes into categories, and build connections to construct the resulting theory. Results: The authors interviewed 11 EM faculty from throughout the United States. Participants described a complex process to determine SLOE competitiveness. They began by contextualizing the SLOE to determine its trustworthiness and value before using various components of the SLOE to stratify and refine their understanding of competitiveness. Finally, when participants noted the inconsistency between different aspects of the SLOE, they used various methods to reconcile discordances and determine competitiveness. Conclusions: This study illuminates the framework used by EM faculty to determine applicant competitiveness based on the SLOE and highlights several factors that SLOE authors should consider to ensure the accurate and efficient transfer of information.

Identifiers

PMID39185031
PMCPMC11343972

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.