ReviewAnnals of medicine2026
Programmatic assessment in undergraduate diagnostic radiography education: a conceptual framework informed by the Australian context.
Review in Annals of medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionProgrammatic assessment offers a system-level approach to evaluating students' competence by integrating multiple low-stakes assessments, longitudinal evidence and expert judgement. Although widely adopted across several health education disciplines in Australia, radiography education providers have not implemented programmatic assessment at a programme or course level. This paper proposes a radiography-specific programmatic assessment framework. The objective is to translate core programmatic assessment principles into curriculum design strategies that strengthen feedback, improve the defensibility of decisions and enhance national workforce readiness. DISCUSSION: The paper outlines key purposes of programmatic assessment in undergraduate radiography education including supporting learning, strengthening feedback mechanisms, tracking developmental progress and enabling defensible decisions grounded in longitudinal evidence. Critical design considerations include aligning assessments with a capability framework, generating evidence across diverse clinical contexts, prioritising narrative feedback and using portfolios as central evidence repositories. The analysis highlights the importance of competence committees for high-stakes decisions and the need to support shared assessment practices across varied clinical placement environments. The proposed radiography model integrates six components: capability framework, evidence generation, evidence aggregation, interpretation, decision-making and system learning. This model addresses radiography's multimodality workflow, training variation across sites and accreditation requirements for fairness, transparency and systematic monitoring.
conclusionProgrammatic assessment offers a coherent approach to strengthening radiography education by supporting clearer insight into learner development and ensuring consistent evidence of capability achievement across clinical environments. When adapted to radiography's multimodality practice and evolving workforce demands, programmatic assessment enhances readiness for independent practice and supports continuous curriculum improvement.
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.