ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2026
The complexities of comprehensive exams in epidemiology.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comprehensive exams are a standard component of doctoral-level training programs in epidemiology. In this manuscript, we describe current practices in the administration of comprehensive examinations across doctoral programs in epidemiology and discuss variation in the content, format, and structure of these exams. We present results from a survey of 33 epidemiology programs about the comprehensive exam process. We also discuss a symposium focused on comprehensive exams that was part of the 2025 Society for Epidemiologic Research annual meeting. The symposium included speakers with specific expertise in designing comprehensive exams, as well as faculty from several different epidemiology programs across North America. The survey found important differences in format (ie, written, oral, general epidemiology, substantive topics), when the exams are administered, and the level of epidemiology knowledge targeted. In this manuscript, we also discuss common challenges programs face, including developing and grading exams. By sharing this information with a wide audience of epidemiologists, we aim to facilitate discussion to improve the comprehensive exam process for doctoral students in our field. This work also fits with a broader goal to initiate discussion about doctoral-level training in epidemiology.
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.