ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2026
Designing and validating a clinical competency logbook for workplace-based assessment in undergraduate medical education: A foundational psychometric analysis.
Article 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The implementation of competency-based medical education (CBME) demands robust, validated workplace-based assessment (WBA) tools. In this study, we aimed to develop and conduct an initial validation of the clinical competency logbook (CCL) as a structured instrument designed to assess the observed clinical competencies of undergraduate medical students in authentic practice settings. Methods: A prospective validation study was conducted during the 2024-2025 academic year with 129 fourth-year medical students. The CCL was systematically constructed through literature review and expert consensus using a two-round Delphi process to establish content validity. Students were assessed using the CCL during two consecutive 4-week clinical rotations. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) with a two-way random-effects model. Exploratory fairness analysis was conducted based on subgroup comparisons between male and female students. Results: The CCL exhibited strong content validity throughout its expert-driven development process. Overall test-retest reliability was moderate to good (ICC = 0.711, 95% confidence interval [0.591, 0.796]). However, the reliability varied significantly by gender subgroups: ICC = 0.507 for males and ICC = 0.346 for females, which was attributed to ceiling effects and restricted score variance in the female subgroup. The mean scores differed significantly between genders, highlighting the need for further investigations of potential rater bias or other unmeasured variables, although these findings remain strictly exploratory. Conclusion: The CCL exhibited acceptable psychometric properties for formative assessment in undergraduate medical education. The strong content validity and moderate overall reliability (though highly dependent on score distribution and varying by subgroup) support its use for tracking student progress and providing structured feedback. These findings highlight the importance of contextual interpretation of reliability coefficients and suggest that caution is required for high-stakes summative decisions. In this study, we produced an evidence-informed instrument and methodological framework for developing WBA instruments in CBME programs.
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.