ArticlePerspectives on medical education2025
Many Minds, One Model: Exploring Decision Making of an Undergraduate Medicine Competency Committee Using the Construct of a Shared Mental Model.
Article in Perspectives on 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.
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.
- Inside Their Minds: A Multi-Institutional Exploration into the Decision-Making of Medical School Competency Committee Members.Perspectives on medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Competency committees (CCs) are considered mandatory in competency-based medical education. There remains insufficient research to guide programs in optimizing the work of CCs especially in the undergraduate context. In order to address this gap, the functioning of an undergraduate CC is examined using the construct of a shared mental model (SMM) to explore factors and context that inform a holistic review of performance. Methods: A qualitative exploratory study was conducted. Using purposive sampling, 10 members of a Student Progress Committee (SPC) participated in 60-minute, semi-structured interviews (April 2022 to June 2023). An abductive thematic analysis approach generated themes which were then mapped onto a mental model construct. This heuristic helped construct and visualize the inner workings of a SMM as a holistic decision-making process that operates on manipulating multiple data inputs (quantitative and qualitative) in order to generate robust outcomes. Results: SPC members shared similar expectations of the task at hand while having multiple and conflicting perspectives about inputs important for decision making. Members grappled with what they perceived as a subjective process but agreed that having principles specific to holistic decision making can generate robust outcomes. Diversity of group membership was essential for minimizing member bias and group conformity in decision making. Discussion: This new understanding of how CCs operate at the undergraduate level can inform the SPC and guide its members in their quality improvement efforts and inform broader program-wide improvement, locally; moreover, it may contribute to the ongoing improvement of CCs in other settings.
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.