ArticlePloS one2026
International medical graduates' experiences of clinical competency assessment in postgraduate and licensing examinations: A scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInternational Medical Graduates (IMGs) represent a substantial proportion of the medical workforce globally and are known to face difficulties in their working lives, including differential attainment in assessment. This scoping review explores existing literature relating to IMGs' experiences of clinical competency assessments and identifies gaps in current knowledge.
methodsFollowing the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews we examined peer-reviewed literature published between 2009 and 2025, without language restrictions. Three independent reviewers contributed to each stage of the process. The British Education Index, the Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), PubMed, Psych Info, Scopus, and Soc Index were searched. Forwards and backwards citation searching and a grey literature search were also performed.
resultsWe identified 44 publications which met the inclusion criteria. These described the experiences of over 7200 IMGs, who had received their primary medical qualifications in 54 named countries, spanning all 6 world regions as defined by the World Health Organisation. Most sources were from the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. The review identified three headline categories which summarise the factors that impacted on IMGs' assessment experiences: internal and personal factors; external and social factors; and institutional and systemic factors. Notable evidence gaps included the impact of age, gender, country of primary medical qualification, years since last in practice, and lower levels of language proficiency on IMGs' experiences of assessment. Our review reveals the need for further research from a broader range of medical specialties and from a wider geographic spread to improve our understanding of this important topic.
conclusionThis scoping review maps the experiences of IMGs in relation to clinical competency assessment and offers useful insights highlighting both positive and negative influences, which could inform future assessment methodologies and support interventions for IMGs. By creating fairer and more supportive assessment pathways, healthcare systems can harness the full potential of IMGs, ensuring their valuable skills and diverse experiences are retained for the benefit of all patients.
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.