Ensuring Competency: Quality Assurance in High-Stakes Assessments in Medical Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v6i5.1761Keywords:
Clinical Competence, Higher education, High Stakes Assessments, Medical Education, Professionalism, Quality AssuranceAbstract
Quality assurance (QA) is fundamental in maintaining the validity, reliability, and fairness of assessment systems in medical education. With high-stakes assessments significantly influencing certification, licensure, and patient safety, robust QA mechanisms are essential to ensure the competence of future healthcare providers. Objective: To critically evaluate the role and application of quality assurance in high-stakes assessments within medical education, and to analyze its alignment with general assessment principles and its impact on educational outcomes and patient care. Methods: An analytical essay was developed through a comprehensive literature review spanning January 2009 to May 2024. Databases including PubMed and Google Scholar were used to retrieve peer-reviewed literature using the following keywords: quality assurance in higher education, quality assurance in medical education, competence in medical education, and high-stakes assessments in medical education. Selection criteria emphasized relevance, recency, and applicability to high-stakes medical assessments. Themes were synthesized and analyzed for critical insights and implications. Results: The literature reveals several key QA-related themes in high-stakes medical assessments. These include the need for standardized assessment formats, rigorous validation processes, continuous faculty development, transparent governance, and mechanisms for feedback and reform. Effective QA aligns closely with general principles of assessment, such as validity, reliability, fairness, and feasibility. QA is also vital across all domains of assessment—written, performance-based (OSCEs), and workplace-based assessment—ensuring defensible results that withstand scrutiny from regulatory bodies and stakeholders. Conclusion: Quality assurance is indispensable in high-stakes medical assessments. By embedding QA processes in every stage of assessment design, delivery, and review, medical institutions can ensure the production of competent graduates and uphold public trust in the medical profession. The development and enforcement of rigorous QA frameworks are therefore essential for the continuous improvement of medical education standards and patient safety.
Downloads
References
Cheng A, Fang Y, Li Y, Yin H, Meng Z, He Q. Simulation-based learning for improving nurses' competence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(19-20):3471-3484.
Downie WW, Charlton JDG. Test-retest reliability of a new clinical reasoning assessment instrument. Med Educ. 2009;43(2):180-188.
Dyrbye LH, Thomas MR, Shanafelt TD, Baptiste DW, Stuart SG, Jones PB. Burnout and suicidal ideation among medical students and residents: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Acad Med. 2017;92(1):48-58.
Grant G, Marsden P. Assessment and quality assurance in higher education. London: Routledge; 2007.
Jeffries PR. A framework for designing, implementing and evaluating simulation in nurse education. Nurse Educ Pract. 2014;14(1):12-16.
Ludmerer SM, Hodges HC, Abrahamowicz M, Catton PB, Clemente P, Cook DA, et al. Twelve core competencies for medical education: A report from the AAMC core competencies task force. Med Educ. 2010;44(6):539-543.
McManus IC. Assessment strategies for medical education. Med Educ. 2016;50(3):283-292.
Norman GR, Skeff KM, Hwang S, Iobst WZ, Durning SJ. The role of assessment in competency-based medical education. J Grad Med Educ. 2016;8(1):126-130.
Skeff KM, Chandramohan B. Quality assurance in high-stakes medical education examinations. Med Educ. 2014;48(8):753-763.
Wilson M. Learner assessment. London: Routledge; 2009.
Zen S, Wang Z, Liu J, Bao H. A review of adaptive testing in medical education. Med Educ. 2019;53(5):425-438.
Zeng Q, Liu X, Lin Y, Chen Z, Wang Z, Xu J. Artificial intelligence in medical education: A review. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2023;10(2):100080.
Issenburg SB, McGaghie WC, Petrusesz M, Gordon DA, Suver ME. Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: A review of the evidence. Acad Med. 2005;80(2):201-208.
Jeffries PR. A framework for designing, implementing and evaluating simulation in nurse education. Nurse Educ Pract. 2014;14(1):12-16.
Linacre JM. Sample size and content validity. Educ Meas Issues Pract. 1994;13(3):35-41.
Vimpani JW, Wright SM, Subramaniam M. The why and how of quality assurance in high-stakes medical education assessments. Postgrad Med J. 2020;96(1139):544-551.
Epstein RM. Assessment in medical education. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(4):387-396.
McManus IC. High-stakes assessment in medical education. Med Teach. 2016;38(1):1-6.
Norman G, Norcini J, Bordage G. Competency-based education: Milestones or millstones? J Grad Med Educ. 2016;8(1):1-6.
Norcini J, Burch V. Workplace-based assessment as an educational tool: AMEE Guide No. 31. Med Teach. 2007;29(9-10):855-871.
Schuwirth LWT, van der Vleuten CPM. Programmatic assessment: From assessment of learning to assessment for learning. Med Teach. 2011;33(6):478-485.
Van der Vleuten CPM, Driessen EW. What would happen to education if we take education evidence seriously? Perspect Med Educ. 2014;3(3):222-232.
Wass V, Van der Vleuten C, Shatzer J, Jones R. Assessment of clinical competence. Lancet. 2001;357(9260):945-949.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Qudsia Nawaz, Sadia A Ghaffar, Sadia Shafiq, Shazia Tufail, Mounazza Rehman, Junaid Sarfaraz Khan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
