The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 77 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature
Open accessAbstract
Previous academic performance is a good, but not perfect, predictor of achievement in medical training It accounts for 23% of the variance in performance in undergraduate medical training and 6% of that in postgraduate competency Long term prospective cohort studies or case-control studies are needed to examine predictors of success after qualification, and reliable, valid, and fair models of medical job competence need to be developed Relatively little research has been done into the importance of learning styles, interviews, ethnicity, sex, personal statements, and references, but a strategic learning style, white ethnicity, and female sex are associated with success in medical training
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Previous academic performance is a moderate predictor of undergraduate medical success and a small predictor of postgraduate competence; after correction it explains 23% and 6% of variance respectively. Strategic learning style, white ethnicity, and female sex are associated with success, while evidence on interviews, personality, personal statements, and references is limited or mixed.
Key findings
- Previous academic performance had an uncorrected average effect size of 0.30 for undergraduate medical success and 0.14 for postgraduate competence. After correction for unreliability and range restriction, these rose to 0.48 and 0.24, accounting for 23% and 6% of variance respectively.
- Strategic learning was consistently positively associated with final marks (uncorrected r 0.178 to 0.26), and “convergers” tended to perform better than other Kolb learning styles. Deep learning showed positive associations in some studies (0.157 to 0.262), while surface learning showed a negative association in one study (−0.204) but was not consistently replicated.
- Women tended to perform better than men in medical training and clinical assessments, though some early assessment differences favoured men and were small. Ethnic minority students were more likely to fail a medical examination than white students, but non-UK ethnic minority students in the UK may perform better than white UK students; previous academic performance tended to overpredict for ethnic minorities and underpredict for white students.
- Personality findings included conscientiousness as a positive predictor of preclinical achievement (standardised regression coefficient = 0.58) even after controlling for A level grades, extraversion predicting success in paediatric objective examinations (0.51), and state anxiety weakly negatively associated with performance (3% of variance), while trait anxiety was not significantly related. Interviews may add predictive information, but the academic reference had no predictive value and personal statements had too few data for conclusions.
Methods
- Systematic review conducted June to August 2000, searching Medline OVID, Web of Science, and PsycLIT, plus hand-searching Medical Education, Journal of Medical Education, and Academic Medicine and reference lists. Inclusion required clear predictors and outcomes, acceptable statistical analysis, medicine-specific studies, and validated indices for non-academic predictors.
- Meta-analysis used hierarchical linear modelling with correlation coefficients as level 1 variables and sample sizes as level 2 variables; correlations were Fisher r-to-Z transformed, and effect sizes were corrected for unreliability and range restriction. Cohen’s calibration was used for interpretation.
- The review identified 62 papers on previous academic performance, 31 on personality, 16 on sex, 14 on ethnicity, 11 on motivation or study habits, 16 on interviews, 2 on personal statements, and 1 on references. The undergraduate meta-analysis included 753 usable correlation coefficients from 21,905 participants; the postgraduate meta-analysis included 32 coefficients from 2,487 participants across 5 studies.
Limitations
- Stated: few comparative analyses exist; more research is needed on learning styles, interviews, personal statements, and references; long-term prospective cohort or case-control studies are needed for predictors of success after qualification; reliable, valid, and fair models of medical job competence are needed; the “criterion problem” complicates assessing postgraduate clinical performance; personality measures were too varied for meta-analysis; insufficient data prevented meta-analysis for ethnicity, sex, learning styles, and personal statements; interview studies had small cohorts (23–113), selection biases, and limited outcome measures.
- Stated: no studies examined whether differential experiences of medical training contribute to ethnic differences in performance.
- Evident from the text: the search was limited to three databases and three journals plus reference checking, no assessment of publication bias is mentioned, and the meta-analysis combined diverse academic indicators despite wide variability in effect sizes that was not explained by sample size.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
62 Not checked yet · 17 No basis given · 9 Own result · 7 Own interpretation · 2 Own method
In the paper
“Results of state-trait anxiety studies have shown that state anxiety (anxiety in relation to a specific event, in this case examinations) is significantly, but weakly (3% of the variance), negatively associated with aspects of medical performance”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w63,w84
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This variability was not significantly associated with sample size for either the undergraduate analysis or the postgraduate analysis.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Tests of previous academic performance
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A meta-analysis of the personality measures was not possible owing to the wide variety of measures used”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It accounts for 23% of the variance in performance in undergraduate medical training”
- Also stated in: § Tests of previous academic performance · hedged
“This corrected coefficient indicates that 23% of variance in medical school performance can be explained by previous academic performance.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Abstract
plaincorrelationaln = 905- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Tests of previous academic performance · hedged
In the paper
“but that trait anxiety (non-specific anxiety) is not significantly related to performance.w63,w84”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w63,w84
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 95% confidence intervals and ranges indicate a wide variability in effect sizes across the studies.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Tests of previous academic performance
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and 6% of that in postgraduate competency”
- Also stated in: § Tests of previous academic performance · hedged
“This corrected coefficient indicates that 6% of variance in postgraduate performance can be explained by previous academic performance.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Tests of previous academic performance · hedged
In the paper
“Dominance has been shown to be correlated with undergraduate multiple choice question scores (uncorrected r -0.26)”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w79
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“With this measure, eight subscales have emerged consistently as predictors of success in medical training: “dominance,” “tolerance,” “sociability,” “self acceptance,” “well being,” “responsibility,” “achievement via conformance,” and “achievement via independence.”w69,w79”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w69,w79
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Within medicine, extraversion predicted success in paediatric objective examinations (0.51).w83”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w83
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The quote only partly states this claim. 4
- It may state two separate claims as one. 23
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the prediction of undergraduate medical success, the average effect size was 0.30 (SE 0.016, range -0.22 to 0.74, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.33, P < 0.00001).”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Tests of previous academic performance
plaincorrelationaln = 905- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
In the paper
“well being and achievement via conformance with success in oral examinations (0.22 and 0.32).w79”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w79
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Correction for unreliability increased the effect size correlation to 0.17 (95% confidence interval 0.06 to 0.27), and further correction for restriction of range increased it to 0.24 (0.08 to 0.37).”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Tests of previous academic performance
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relatively little research has been done into the importance of learning styles, interviews, ethnicity, sex, personal statements, and references”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, although some evidence shows that deep learning has a positive association with performance in examinations (0.157 to 0.262), w28,w104 other studies have failed to replicate this finding.w101,w103”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Learning styles
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w28
- Not checked yetcites w104
- Not checked yetcites w101
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The indicators of previous academic performance ranged widely in the types of assessment and the response formats used.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Search criteria
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, these differences were small and reached significance only when the sample sizes were large.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No studies have examined whether differential experiences of training in medical schools contribute to this difference.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“and are more likely to attain an honours degree.w2”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w2
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similarly, although a significant negative association has been reported between surface learning and examination performance (for example, -0.204), w28 several studies have failed to replicate this effect.w91,w101,w103”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Learning styles
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w28
- Not checked yetcites w91
- Not checked yetcites w101
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The studies examining the tripartite model in medical students have shown a relatively consistent finding of a significant positive association between the use of strategic learning and final marks (uncorrected r 0.178 to 0.26) w28,w99,w103-w105 ; only one study failed to replicate this effect.w101”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Learning styles
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w28
- Not checked yetcites w99
- Not checked yetcites w103-w105
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most commonly used test has been the California personality inventory.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Two studies suggested that men slightly outperformed women on early assessments (for example, National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) part I) but that these differences disappeared later (NBME part II).w85,w86”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w85,w86
hedgedcorrelationaln = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, in one study, “service quality variables” (such as “helping others”) predicted women's clinical grades and “individual mastery variables” (such as “intellectual growth”) predicted men's clinical grades.w89”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w89
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, measures of previous academic performance tend to overpredict for ethnic minorities but to underpredict for white students.w94,w95”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w94,w95
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, a significant difference was reported between men and women in NBME part II paediatrics scores, with men scoring 82.13 and women 82.70.w86”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w86
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The research that has been undertaken has mainly concentrated on measures of previous academic ability as a predictor of undergraduate achievement.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Discussion and conclusions
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These studies showed no differences and concluded that the interview added little to the selection process.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Learning styles
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w113
- Not checked yetcites w114
- Not checked yetcites w107
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These studies reported evidence that interview scores were able to predict future success.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Kolb model
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w27
- Not checked yetcites w30
- Not checked yetcites w111
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relatively few studies provide comparative analyses of the predictive power of the wide variety of factors used in combination for selecting medical students (interview, grade point average, learning styles, personality).”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Discussion and conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pattern of findings is confirmed by our meta-analysis.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Prediction of postgraduate clinical competence
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Virtually no research has examined the predictive power of personal statements.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Discussion and conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“However, little is known about factors such as the impact of inter-interviewer variation, whether any systematic biases exist, and the effect of training for interviewers.w117”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Kolb model
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w117
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Few studies have examined the effects of learning styles, interviews, personal statements, and references in relation to achievement in medical training.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Discussion and conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Cohen argues that an effect size of 0.10 should be classed as “small,” 0.30 as “moderate,” and 0.50 or greater as “large.””
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Statistical analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The uncorrected correlation coefficient would be classed as moderate in size according to Cohen's calibration, and the final corrected coefficient approaches a large effect.12”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Tests of previous academic performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] source
hedgedcorrelationaln = 905- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Both these factors (unreliability and restriction of range) statistically limit the size of the correlations between predictors and outcomes.8”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Statistical analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Hunter JE Schmidt FL .Methods of meta-analysis. London:Sage,1990.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Previous academic performance is a good, but not perfect, predictor of achievement in medical training”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Both the uncorrected and corrected coefficients are classed as small according to Cohen's calibration.12”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Tests of previous academic performance
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The criteria medical schools use to select future doctors are similar across the country.4”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [4] McManus, 1998, Factors affecting likelihood of applicants being offered a place in medical schools in the United Kingdom in 1996 and 1997: retrospective study., BMJ source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Different aspects of previous academic performance might be differentially predictive at different stages of training, w26”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Search criteria
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w26
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“This seems to be at variance with studies showing that higher levels of internal beliefs are associated with academic success.13”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Conscientiousness has been shown in previous research to be related to success in a variety of occupational settings, and extraversion has been correlated with success in jobs that involve a social dimension (for example, sales).18”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Tett, 1991, Personality measures as predictors of job performance: a meta-analytic review., Pers Psychol source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some of the subscales of the California personality inventory, especially the achievement subscales, may relate to conscientiousness in the Big 5.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“This seems to be at variance with studies showing that higher levels of internal beliefs are associated with academic success.13”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This is consistent with arousal theory, which postulates that people perform best at an optimal level of arousal.15”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Yerkes, 1908, The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation., J Compar Neurol Psychol source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Recent developments in personality theory have suggested that five factors underlie normal personality and that these can be found in previously reported measures of personality.16 17”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Defensive externals act much like internals but endorse an external orientation as a verbal defence against failure.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personality tests
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [14] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, this is only a moderate effect, suggesting that learning styles can change.w28”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Learning styles
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites w28
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One solution to this problem has been to develop competency based models of core and specific skills, through detailed job analyses of individual medical specialties.30”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Prediction of postgraduate clinical competence
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] Patterson, 2000, A competency model for general practice: implications for selection, training and development., Br J Gen Pract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is consistent with the conclusions from studies of the value of references in other occupations.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Personal statements and references
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the studies had methodological limitations, including the use of small numbers (cohort range 23-113), a failure to eliminate selection biases, and a limited range of outcome measures.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Learning styles
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Predictors are likely to be intercorrelated, 31,w10 as are outcome measures.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Discussion and conclusions
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] source
- Not checked yetcites w10
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Students entering medical school are likely to be at the top end of the potential range of scores for previous academic performance and are also likely to do well in their medical school training.
“In addition, students entering medical school are likely to be at the top end of the potential range of scores for previous academic performance and are also likely to do well in their medical school training.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Previous academic ability, personal statements, references, and interviews are traditionally used in selection, while personality and learning styles are not traditionally used.
“Previous academic ability, personal statements, references, and interviews are all traditionally used in selection, but how good are they at predicting future performance?Personality and learning styles are not traditionally used, but should they be?”
The paper relies on this without support.
Learning across the medical degree (and postgraduate learning) occurs over time.
“Furthermore, learning across the medical degree (and indeed postgraduate learning) occurs over time, and time series analyses and models that allow for prediction of change over time would also be a useful approach.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The personal statement forms an important part of the current selection process in the United Kingdom.
“This is an important area for future research, as the personal statement forms an important part of the current selection process in the United Kingdom.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“GPA and MCAT are known to strongly account for the variance in test performance in medical school 12 .”
From Effect of repeated/spaced formative assessments on medical school final exam performance (2017) · cites this paper as [12]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Discussion and conclusions
“The strength of this association before corrections was moderate (0.30) in terms of Cohen's calibration, becoming large (0.48) after correction.”
§ Learning in practice Factors associated with success in medical school: systematic review of the literature > Statistical analysis
“Cohen argues that an effect size of 0.10 should be classed as "small," 0.30 as "moderate," and 0.50 or greater as "large."”
Citations
Cites
Cohen, J. (1992) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155 · Cited by 8,771
The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation
Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908) · Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology · doi:10.1002/cne.920180503 · Cited by 6,911
Personality Structure: Emergence Of The 5-Factor Model
Digman, J. M. (1990) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.41.020190.002221 · Cited by 6,731
Personality trait structure as a human universal.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1997) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.52.5.509 · Cited by 4,234
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.124.2.262 · Cited by 4,180
Hunter, J., & Schmidt, F. (2004) · doi:10.4135/9781412985031 · Cited by 3,023
Intelligence, personality, and interests: Evidence for overlapping traits
Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.121.2.219 · Cited by 1,829
PERSONALITY MEASURES AS PREDICTORS OF JOB PERFORMANCE: A META‐ANALYTIC REVIEW
Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. G. (1991) · Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00696.x · Cited by 1,481
Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Stern, H. S., Dunson, D. B., Vehtari, A., & Rubin, D. B. (2013) · Chapman & Hall/CRC eBooks · doi:10.1201/b16018-21 · Cited by 631
Locus of control and academic achievement: A literature review.
Findley, M. J., & Cooper, H. M. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.2.419 · Cited by 568
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Prat, 1993, Predicting the first-year performance of international medical graduates in an internal medicine residency., Acad Med, 11, 856
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Tsugawa, Y., Jena, A. B., Figueroa, J. F., Orav, E. J., Blumenthal, D. M., & Jha, A. K. (2016) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.7875 · Cited by 1,069
Factors influencing death at home in terminally ill patients with cancer: systematic review
Gomes, B., & Higginson, I. J. (2006) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38740.614954.55 · Cited by 977
The Big Five personality traits, learning styles, and academic achievement
Komarraju, M., Karau, S. J., Schmeck, R. R., & Avdic, A. (2011) · Personality and Individual Differences · doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.04.019 · Cited by 733
McManus, I. C., Keeling, A. N., & PAICE, E. W. (2004) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-2-29 · Cited by 558
How effective are selection methods in medical education? A systematic review
Patterson, F., Knight, A., Dowell, J. S., Nicholson, S., Cousans, F., & Cleland, J. (2015) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12817 · Cited by 489
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferguson, E., James, D., & Madeley, L.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Ferguson, Eamonn
- ORCID
- Ferguson, Eamonn
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-04-20
- Volume
- 324
- Issue
- 7343
- Pages
- 952-957
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC102330
- OpenAlex
- W2085677016
- Cited by
- 811
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 56 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 48 · 2012: 55
- FWCI
- 2.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Medical Education and Admissions
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Keywords
- predictors of academic performance, undergraduate medical education, graduate medical education, prior academic achievement, learning styles, job interviews, ethnicity, sex differences, personal statements, reference
- MeSH terms
- Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Educational Status, Ethnicity, Humans, Interviews as Topic, Learning, Personality Tests, School Admission Criteria, Sex Factors, Linear Models
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
