Integrating examination-based and non-examination-based assessments is the most effective strategy for identifying weaknesses in clinical reasoning skills¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q1
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The review argues that exclusive reliance on high-stakes examinations has limitations and that using both examination-based and non-examination-based assessments represents the most effective identification strategy. → Philip SJ 2026

Evidence¶

Philip SJ 2026¶

Philip SJ, Cholifatul UF, Felicia CC, Nooreen A. (2026). Strategies for remediating clinical reasoning skill deficits in underperforming residents: a scoping review. J Educ Eval Health Prof. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2026.23.3

q1 · i? · review · r2

The review's interpretive synthesis in the Discussion, arguing from stated limitations of each approach: examinations are affected by performance anxiety and unfamiliarity, while workplace assessment lacks a standardized threshold for distinguishing genuine deficits from transient stressors. This is an argued position, not a tested result.

"Integrating examination-based and non-examination-based assessments is therefore essential to developing a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of struggling learners."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Self-reported instruments measure AI self-efficacy (perceptions) rather than AI literacy abilities, so both should be included in comprehensive assessment — related
• Learner-related factors are the most frequently identified barriers to effective remediation of clinical reasoning skill deficits — related