Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42306124›Full record

ArticleNeurology. Education2026

Education Research: Moving Beyond "Outstanding": Neurology Program Directors' Perspectives on the MSPE Clerkship Summaries.

Robert Thompson Stone, Tamara B Kaplan, Stephen Joseph Powell, Catherine Nicholas, Samantha P Myers, Melanie Braun, Andres Fernandez, Christopher J Mooney

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurology. Education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Robert Thompson StoneDepartment of Neurology, University of Rochester, NY.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1062-854X
Tamara B KaplanDepartment of Neurology, Harvard University, Boston, MA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6262-6960
Stephen Joseph PowellDepartment of Neurology, University of Rochester, NY.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2428-5835
Catherine NicholasDepartment of Neurology, University of Rochester, NY.
Samantha P MyersUniversity of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, NY.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0819-7984
Melanie BraunDepartment of Neurology, University of Rochester, NY.
Andres FernandezDepartment of Neurology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadephia, PA; and.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5389-6232
Christopher J MooneyDepartments of Medicine, Health Humanities and Bioethics, and Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester, NY.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2881-2169

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and Objectives: As standardized metrics in residency selection change, residency program directors increasingly rely on narrative components of the Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) clerkship summaries. However, wide variability in structure, language, and transparency limits their usefulness for high-stakes decision making. The aims of this study were to explore neurology and child neurology program directors' perspectives on the utility of MSPE neurology clerkship summaries and to identify features that enhance or undermine their value in residency selection. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured interviews with US neurology and child neurology residency program directors. Participants reviewed and discussed 4 constructed MSPE neurology clerkship summary cases developed from deidentified authentic MSPE excerpts and designed to reflect variation in structure and content. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis informed by theories of narrative assessment and discourse. Trustworthiness was supported through analytic memos, peer debriefing, and investigator triangulation. Results: Thirteen program directors participated, and 6 themes emerged: (1) Participants valued honest and transparent narratives but perceived candid discussion of limitations as risky for students; (2) institutional variability in grading systems, access to neurology experiences, and evaluator practices limited fair comparison of applicants; (3) narratives were most useful when clearly structured, concise, and transparent about how evaluations were synthesized; (4) comparative information was viewed as essential for decision making, despite its susceptibility to bias; (5) program directors consistently reported that coded language was difficult to interpret and should be avoided; and (6) nonspecific laudatory comments diminished narrative value, whereas brief, concrete behavioral examples enhanced credibility and interpretability. Discussion: Neurology clerkship summaries in the MSPE remain influential yet imperfect tools for residency selection. Program directors favor narratives that are structured and specific and avoid coded or vague language. Targeted faculty development and adoption of shared narrative frameworks represent actionable strategies to improve fairness, clarity, and trust in narrative assessment within neurology education.

Identifiers

PMID42306124
PMCPMC13268655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.