ArticleJournal of educational evaluation for health professions2025
Longitudinal relationships between Korean medical students' academic performance in medical knowledge and clinical performance examinations: a retrospective longitudinal study.
Article in Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study investigated the longitudinal relationships between performance on 3 examinations assessing medical knowledge and clinical skills among Korean medical students in the clinical phase. This study addressed the stability of each examination score and the interrelationships among examinations over time.
methodsA retrospective longitudinal study was conducted at Yonsei University College of Medicine in Korea with a cohort of 112 medical students over 2 years. The students were in their third year in 2022 and progressed to the fourth year in 2023. We obtained comprehensive clinical science examination (CCSE) and progress test (PT) scores 3 times (T1-T3), and clinical performance examination (CPX) scores twice (T1 and T2). Autoregressive cross-lagged models were fitted to analyze their relationships.
resultsFor each of the 3 examinations, the score at 1 time point predicted the subsequent score. Regarding cross-lagged effects, the CCSE at T1 predicted PT at T2 (β=0.472, P<0.001) and CCSE at T2 predicted PT at T3 (β=0.527, P<0.001). The CPX at T1 predicted the CCSE at T2 (β=0.163, P=0.006), and the CPX at T2 predicted the CCSE at T3 (β=0.154, P=0.006). The PT at T1 predicted the CPX at T2 (β=0.273, P=0.006).
conclusionThe study identified each examination's stability and the complexity of the longitudinal relationships between them. These findings may help predict medical students' performance on subsequent examinations, potentially informing the provision of necessary student support.
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.