Claims

In a standardized faculty-guidance and coaching remediation program, 96% of learners with clinical reasoning deficits passed reassessment

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? Of 53 participants in the Guerrasio and Aagaard program, 51 (96%) successfully passed reassessment, and 38 (72%) ultimately graduated or continued to practice in good standing. → 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

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports, citing Guerrasio and Aagaard (2014), a prospective cohort study of a standardized remediation program emphasizing "faculty guidance and coaching." Outcomes are descriptive percentages; no effect size is printed.

"Of the 53 participants, 51 (96%) successfully passed reassessment. Among these learners, 38 (72%) ultimately graduated or continued to practice in good standing."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.