Claims

Mandatory attendance policy initially raised attendance but was abolished due to dissatisfaction, administrative burden and declining performance

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · 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? The single reported strategy, a mandatory attendance policy, initially increased attendance but was later abolished due to student and staff dissatisfaction, high administrative burden and declining USMLE step 1 performance. → Nagappan Palaniappan Ganesh 2025

Evidence

Nagappan Palaniappan Ganesh 2025

Nagappan Palaniappan Ganesh, Tan Sapphire Rou Xi, Absar Shazia, Brown Samuel, Sayers Sarah, McManus Alex, Arora Anmol, Kuhn Isla, Khan Faris, Lau Edward, Tulinius Charlotte. (2025). Changes in medical student attendance at in-person teaching sessions: a systematic review. BMJ Open. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2024-091768

q2 · i? · review · r3

Review's account of Lamb et al, the only included study proposing a strategy. The policy was abolished following "increasing student and staff dissatisfaction, high administrative resources to regulate it" and declining performance.

"However, there was a subsequent abolishment of this policy due to increasing student and staff dissatisfaction, high administrative resources to regulate it and an observed decline in academic performance as measured by scores and pass rates on the USMLE step 1."

Discussion

Learner Variables

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.