ReviewJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2026
Equity in basic medical education accreditation: A scoping review.
Review in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Accreditation standards ensure quality in undergraduate or basic medical education (BME). Equity is often described alongside diversity and inclusion but its roles in the development and implementation of accreditation standards remain unclear. In this scoping review, we explored how the term "equity" is portrayed in the BME accreditation literature. Methodology: We performed a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute protocol using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Scoping Review (PRISMA-ScR) extension. Systematic search was conducted across five databases and grey literature sources from their inception until May 2024. We included studies that explicitly or implicitly discussed the concept of equity in relation to the BME accreditation process. Inductive thematic analysis of the selected literature was conducted based on the approach of Braun and Clarke. Results: Among 1105 records, 15 met the inclusion criteria. None of the selected studies explicitly used the term "equity." All 15 records discussed the "contextual" adaptation of accreditation standards and were labeled as discussing "equity" implicitly. These implicit discussions revealed three recurring domains: (1) equity at the interregional level, highlighting Global North and South disparities and the risks of Western hegemony; (2) equity at the intraregional level, reflecting inequities between well-resourced and under-resourced institutions; and (3) equity at the surveyor level, emphasizing the influence of the evaluator's background and training. Discussion: Equity is a fundamental but often vaguely defined concept in the context of BME accreditation processes. We propose a three-level framework for describing equity in this context to assist regulators, accrediting organizations, and policy makers in the development and implementation of accreditation processes.
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.