ArticleAEM education and training2026
Preparing Emergency Medicine Residents for the Certifying Exam: A Pilot Study of a Longitudinal Simulation-Based Assessment Program.
Article in AEM education and training, 2026. 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.
- Preparing Emergency Medicine Residents for the Certifying Exam: A Pilot Study of a Longitudinal Simulation-Based Assessment Program.AEM education and training · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The American Board of Emergency Medicine (ABEM) has recently introduced a new Certifying Exam, which incorporates assessment of performance in a simulated clinical environment. Simulation-based assessments allow for reproducible, controlled evaluations. The residency program has a responsibility to prepare residents for the Certifying Exam and to verify resident competency. We sought to determine the feasibility of a simulation-based assessment program encompassing three domains (resuscitation, procedural skills, and communication) with assessments against pre-determined Minimum Competency Scores (MCS) to provide evidence for program director attestations of competence. Methods: Eight stations were chosen based on ABEM's Certifying Exam content, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones, and proposed Entrustable Professional Activities. Simulation-based case scenarios and assessment checklists were created with standard settings performed using the Mastery Angoff process. These stations were categorized into three different domains: resuscitation (Adult Medical, Pediatric Medical, Trauma, and Neonatal), procedural skills (Direct Laryngoscopy, Cricothyrotomy, and Central Venous Catheter Placement), and communication (Breaking Bad News). Results were summarized with descriptive statistics. Results: Thirty emergency medicine residents at an academic Midwestern residency program underwent assessments over one year. None of the residents achieved the MCS on all eight assessments. Residents achieved the MCS on an average of 4.24 stations. There was large performance variability, particularly for the Pediatric Medical (27%-100% items correct), Neonatal Resuscitation (30%-100%), and Breaking Bad News (31%-100%) scenarios. A greater percentage of residents met the MCS for procedural assessments. Conclusions: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility of a simulation-based assessment program designed to provide objective evidence of clinical competency. Assessment outcomes and associated feedback can be used by learners to guide the development of educational plans for performance improvement. Educators can use the resulting data to assess readiness for independent practice, prepare for the Certifying Exam, and identify content areas that may require additional program-wide 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.