ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2026
Design and Validation of a Mind Map Assessment Checklist Based on Kane's Validity Framework: A Novel Assessment Tool.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Mind mapping supports clinical reasoning and knowledge organization in health professions education, but its use as a standardized formative assessment tool remains limited. This study aimed to design and validate a comprehensive checklist to evaluate mind maps as a formative assessment tool among bachelor of anesthesia technology students, addressing structural, scientific, and creative dimensions. Study Sample and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2023 at Iran University of Medical Sciences among 50 bachelor of anesthesia technology students selected via convenience sampling. The checklist was developed through a literature review and refined using a two-round Delphi process with medical and anesthesia education experts. Validity evidence was collected based on Kane's framework, evaluating scoring (face/content validity), generalization (intra-/inter-rater reliability), extrapolation (correlation with written tests), and implications. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22. Results: The final checklist comprised 10 core items, achieving a high scale-level content validity index (S-CVI/Ave = 0.90). Reliability analyses demonstrated excellent intra-rater (0.88-0.99) and inter-rater agreement (0.90-0.93). Convergent validity was supported by a very strong correlation between mind map scores and written examination scores among a subsample of 24 students ( Conclusion: The developed checklist demonstrated strong validity and reliability for formative assessment in anesthesia technology education. By integrating structural features with scientific accuracy, the tool provides meaningful and consistent evaluation of mind maps as indicators of student learning and knowledge organization. The strong reliability indices and high correlation with written assessments support its use as a standardized tool for providing targeted feedback in clinical 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.