ArticleBMC medical education2025
Bias in student evaluations of teaching in undergraduate medical education: a qualitative study from a medical school in Northern China.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudent evaluations of teaching (SET) are widely used in medical education as a tool to improve teaching quality. However, biases in SET can undermine their effectiveness. While numerous studies have explored bias factors in SET within higher education, few have specifically investigated these factors among medical students in China. This study aims to systematically explore the multidimensional causes of bias in Chinese undergraduate medical students' teaching evaluations.
methodsA qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews with medical students from a medical university in northern China. Participants were selected through purposive sampling to ensure diversity in gender, academic year, and major. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using thematic analysis to identify themes and subthemes related to biases in teaching evaluations.
resultsThe analysis revealed several key themes contributing to biases in SET among medical students: (1) Teacher-Student Interaction: High personal affinity of teachers led to positive bias, while strict classroom management and poor teacher-student relationships resulted in negative bias. (2) Aspects Related to Medical Students: Course attributes and personal interest influenced evaluations, with elective courses and low-interest subjects leading to arbitrary bias. Group influences, such as peer effects and conformity, also contributed to bias. (3) Evaluation System Factors: Doubts about the anonymity of the evaluation system and lack of timely feedback led to self-protective scoring behaviors and arbitrary bias. The presence of informal agreements between teachers and students introduced moral hazards that further skewed evaluations.
conclusionsBiases in medical students' teaching evaluations are multifaceted and can primarily be attributed to teacher-student interpersonal relationships, student perceptions, and systemic issues within the evaluation process. To enhance the objectivity and effectiveness of SET, it is essential to address these biases by reshaping students' understanding of evaluations, improving teacher-student communication, and establishing a digital evaluation system that ensures anonymity and timely feedback.
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.