ArticleAEM education and training2026
Validity Evidence for the New American Board of Emergency Medicine Certifying Examination.
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. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Certification of emergency physicians includes a two-phase process, including both a written qualifying examination and an oral certification examination. In 2026, the American Board of Emergency Medicine will institute a new certifying examination (CE), which will be an in-person assessment with objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs), including focused communication-centered cases and procedural assessments. The objective of this paper is to provide initial validity evidence for the new CE. Methods: A unified view of validity was used to guide the collection of evidence for content validity for the new CE. Moreover, an evaluation of possible validity threats was conducted. An iterative and collaborative process including focus groups, a summit, one-on-one employer interviews, and public and patient input was used to identify key domains and establish the exam blueprint for the new CE. The exploratory phase for exam development, known as the Becoming Certified Initiative, spanned a two-year timeline. Evidence was collected at a practice administration of the CE through the evaluation of candidates' and examiners' perceptions of alignment of case content to emergency medicine (EM) practice, as well as understanding and clarity of the cases and their instructions. Results: The new CE blueprint comprises 10 components: four clinical cases covering clinical decision-making and prioritization and six OSCEs covering procedures, ultrasound, patient-centered communication, reassessment, difficult conversations (delivering unwanted or unexpected information), and managing conflict. Both candidate and examiner volunteers rated the cases as clinically accurate and relevant to EM practice. They also reported that case instructions and prompts within the cases were generally clear and understandable. Conclusion: This study provides important early validity evidence for the new CE to inform emergency physicians and the public at large.
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.