ArticleBMC medical education2024
Investigating the support for equitable admissions policies in health professions education: the Formal Consensus method.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing differences in physician associate/assistant program admissions: observing the influence of demographic characteristics on likelihood of acceptance.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Parental medical background and pre-admission preparedness in China's medical student selection.Medical education online · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Higher education institutions increasingly aim to implement equity in admissions. However, there is no one-size-fits-all solution to determine which equitable admissions procedures are suitable in a specific context, nor which groups should be its beneficiaries. Therefore, we applied the Formal Consensus Method (FCM) to investigate the support amongst experts and stakeholders for different equitable admissions policies and target groups within the context of Health Professions Education in The Netherlands. We found majority support (median of ratings ≥ 7 on a scale of 1 to 9) in both groups for the target groups 'applicants with a low or average socio-economic status' and 'applicants with an underrepresented migration background'. The majority of participants was also in favor of Contextualized Admissions, especially when used to increase enrolment of applicants with a low or average socio-economic status, with an underrepresented migration background, and asylum status holders. Lastly, both groups supported lottery with extra tickets for applicants with an underrepresented migration background. However, as the range of ratings fell outside the FCM prescribed range of 5-9, no case in which there was majority support could be defined as a 'consensus'. The expert group proposed the use of Bonded Medical Places for applicants from the Caribbean parts of the Dutch Kingdom. The policies and target groups for which broad support was found, could contribute to equitable admissions, improved student diversity, and enhanced quality of health education and future care. Our application of the FCM in the area of equitable admissions policies may be useful for researchers in other countries where equity principles are not (widely) used in admissions decisions.
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.