ArticleKorean journal of medical education2025
Validation of criteria for evaluating competency-based curriculum in medical schools using the Delphi hierarchy process method.
Article in Korean journal of medical education, 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
Abstract
purposeThis study examines the implementation of the competency-based curriculum (CBC), which has become the primary educational model in Korean medical schools. It also presents valid evaluation criteria developed through expert consensus to support ongoing improvements in curriculum quality.
methodsThis study examines the implementation of the CBC, which has become the primary educational model in Korean medical schools. It also presents valid evaluation criteria developed through expert consensus to support ongoing improvements in curriculum quality.
resultsThree rounds of Delphi surveys were completed to validate the valid evaluation criteria. Criteria with lower content validity ratios were revised and supplemented based on expert feedback. Ultimately, the process resulted in the identification of five evaluation areas, 16 evaluation items, and 51 evaluation indicators. Among these, the indicators focusing on learner achievement were found to be the most significant.
conclusionThis study developed an evaluation model and valid evaluation criteria specifically designed for the curricula of Korean medical schools. These were created based on expert consensus, which adds to the strength and relevance of the proposed framework. The establishment of valid evaluation criteria is expected to enhance evaluation practices, promote educational quality, and support the continuous improvement of medical education.
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.