ArticlePloS one2025
Trends in progress test performance of medical students at a university in Peru.
Article in PloS one, 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
backgroundProgress testing is a longitudinal assessment method used to monitor the acquisition and retention of knowledge throughout medical training. While progress tests (PTs) have been widely adopted internationally through collaborative networks of medical schools, in Peru, their implementation has been primarily institutional. This study aimed to evaluate longitudinal trends in PT scores at a Peruvian medical school.
methodsWe conducted a longitudinal analysis using data from PTs administered annually between 2017 and 2024. The PT assessed students' knowledge based on the subjects completed at the time of testing. Scores ranged from 0 to 250 and were converted to a 20-point scale. Independent variables included number of PTs taken (1-7), year of entry into medical school (entry cohort; 2017-2024), year of test administration (2017-2024), and sex. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) were used to assess score trends over time, applying an identity link function with a Gaussian distribution and robust standard errors clustered by student ID.
resultsWe included 1,899 test scores from 669 medical students. The mean score across all tests was 9.19 (standard deviation = 2.34). No consistent upward trend in PT scores was observed over the study period; scores decreased by 0.088 points per additional year (CI95% CI: -0.147 to -0.029, p = 0.003). Students who completed five PTs scored significantly higher than those who took four (β = 1.40; 95% CI: 0.79 to 2.01). When stratified by entry cohort, no sustained improvement in scores was observed within cohorts over time.
conclusionOver an eight-year period of administering a progress test at a Peruvian medical school, student performance remained stable, with an average of approximately 50% of questions answered correctly per test. Longitudinal analysis did not reveal a sustained increase in scores as students advanced through the curriculum. This pattern may be explained by the PT design, which assesses only the content covered by students at the time of each administration, in contrast to other PTs that measure end-of-curriculum knowledge across all cohorts. Nevertheless, an increase in median scores was observed during the transition from basic science to clinical subjects.
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.