<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>1981-5271</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Rev. Bras. Educ. Med.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>1981-5271</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Associação Brasileira de Educação Médica]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S1981-52712020000400303</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/1981-5271v44.4-20200055.ing</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The Validity Concept in Medical Education: a Bibliometric Analysis]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="pt"><![CDATA[O Conceito de Validade na Educação Médica: uma Análise Bibliométrica]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Souza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Ruy Guilherme Silveira de]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sequeira]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Bianca Jorge]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Martins]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Antonio Carlos Sansevero]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bicudo]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Angélica Maria]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="Af1">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidade Federal de Roraima  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Boa Vista Roraima]]></addr-line>
<country>Brazil</country>
</aff>
<aff id="Af2">
<institution><![CDATA[,Universidade Estadual de Campinas  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Campinas São Paulo]]></addr-line>
<country>Brazil</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2020</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2020</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>44</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://educa.fcc.org.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S1981-52712020000400303&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://educa.fcc.org.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S1981-52712020000400303&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://educa.fcc.org.br/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S1981-52712020000400303&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Abstract:  Introduction:  Assessment is a critical part of learning and validity is arguably its most important aspect. However, different views and beliefs led to a fragmented conception of the validity meaning, with an excessive focus on psychometric methods and scores, neglecting the consequences and utility of the test. The last decades witnessed the creation of a significant number of tests to assess different aspects of the medical profession formation, but researchers frequently limit their conclusions to the consistency of their measurements, without any further analysis on the educational and social impacts of the test. The objective of this work is to determine the predominant concept of validity in medical education assessment studies.  Method: The authors conducted a bibliometric research of the literature about studies on the assessment of learning of medical students, to determine the prevalent concept of validity. The research covered a period from January 2001 to august 2019. The studies were classified in two categories based on their approach to validity: (1)&#8221; fragmented validity concept&#8221; and (2)&#8221; unified validity concept&#8221;. To help with validity arguments, the studies were also classified based on Miller&#8217;s framework for clinical assessment.  Results:  From an initial search resulting in 2823 studies, 716 studies were selected based on the eligibility criteria, and from the selected list, of which 693 (96,7%) were considered studies of the fragmented validity concept, which prioritized score results over an analysis of the test's utility, and only 23 studies (3,2%) were aligned with a unified view of validity, showing an explicit analysis of the consequences and utility of the test. Although the last decade witnessed a significant increase in the number of assessment studies, this increase was not followed by a significant change in the validity concept.  Conclusions:  This bibliometric analysis demonstrated that assessment studies in medical education still have a fragmented concept of validity, restricted to psychometric methods and scores. The vast majority of studies are not committed to the analysis about the utility and educational impact of an assessment policy. This restrictive view can lead to the waste of valuable time and resources related to assessment methods without significant educational consequences.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="pt"><p><![CDATA[Resumo:  Introdução:  Avaliação é uma parte crítica da aprendizagem, e validade é sem dúvida seu aspecto mais importante. No entanto, diferentes visões e crenças levaram a uma concepção fragmentada do significado de validade, com um foco excessivo nos métodos psicométricos e escores, negligenciando a utilidade do teste. As últimas décadas testemunharam a criação de um número significativo de testes para avaliar diferentes aspectos da formação da profissão médica, mas os pesquisadores frequentemente limitam suas conclusões à consistência de suas medidas, sem nenhuma análise adicional sobre os impactos educacionais e sociais do teste. O objetivo deste trabalho é determinar o conceito predominante de validade nos estudos de avaliação em educação médica.  Método:  Foi realizada uma pesquisa bibliométrica da literatura de estudos sobre avaliação da aprendizagem de estudantes de Medicina para determinar o conceito prevalente de validade. A pesquisa abrangeu o período de janeiro de 2001 a agosto de 2019. Os estudos foram classificados em duas categorias: 1. &#8220;conceito de validade fragmentada&#8221; e 2. &#8220;conceito de validade unificada&#8221;. Para ajudar nos argumentos de validade, os estudos também foram classificados com base na estrutura de Miller para avaliação clínica.  Resultados:  A partir de uma pesquisa inicial que resultou em 2.823 estudos, selecionaram-se 716 com base nos critérios de elegibilidade, e consideraram-se 693 (96,7%) estudos com conceito fragmentado de validade que priorizavam os resultados dos escores em detrimento de uma análise da utilidade do teste, e apenas 23 (3,2%) foram alinhados com uma visão unificada de validade, apresentando uma análise explícita das consequências e da utilidade do teste. Embora a última década tenha testemunhado um aumento expressivo de estudos sobre avaliação, esse crescimento não foi acompanhado por uma mudança significativa do conceito de validade.  Conclusões:  Esta análise bibliométrica demonstrou que os estudos sobre avaliação de aprendizagem em educação médica têm um conceito fragmentado de validade, limitados aos métodos psicométricos e escores. A grande maioria dos trabalhos não está comprometida com uma análise sobre a utilidade e o impacto educacional de uma política de avaliação. Essa visão restritiva pode levar à perda de tempo e recursos valiosos com métodos de avaliação sem consequências educacionais significativas.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Validity]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Medical Education]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Assessment]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="pt"><![CDATA[Validade]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="pt"><![CDATA[Educação Médica]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="pt"><![CDATA[Avaliação]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<label>1</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Downing]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Validity: on the meaninful interpretation of assessment data]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>37</volume>
<numero>9</numero>
<issue>9</issue>
<page-range>830-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<label>2</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Downing]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Validity threats: overcoming interference with proposed interpretation of assessment data]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Medic Educ]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>38</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>327-33</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<label>3</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Newton]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[PE]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Shaw]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SD]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Validity in Educational &amp; Psychological Assessment]]></source>
<year>2014</year>
<edition>Fisrt</edition>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Cambridge Assessment]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<label>4</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Messick]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Validity of Psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from person&#8217;s responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning]]></source>
<year>1994</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[New Jersey ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Educational Testing Service]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<label>5</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bergmann]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[AC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Childs]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RA]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[When I say... validity Argument]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2018</year>
<volume>52</volume>
<numero>10</numero>
<issue>10</issue>
<page-range>1003-4</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<label>6</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ratner]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[The correlaciona coefficient: its values range between +1/-1, or do they?]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>17</volume>
<page-range>139-42</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<label>7</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Souza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[AC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Alexandre]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[NMC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Guirardello]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[EB]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Propriedades psicométricas na avaliação de instrumentos: avaliação da confiabilidade e validade]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Epidemiol Serv Saude]]></source>
<year>2017</year>
<volume>26</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>649-59</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<label>8</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cronbach]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Meehl]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[PE]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Construct validity in psychological tests]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Psychological Bulletin]]></source>
<year>1955</year>
<volume>52</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>281-302</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<label>9</label><nlm-citation citation-type="confpro">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kane]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Currents concerns in validity theory]]></source>
<year>2000</year>
<conf-name><![CDATA[ Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association-AERA]]></conf-name>
<conf-loc>New Orleans </conf-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<label>10</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Messick]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Validity]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Linen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Educational Measurement]]></source>
<year>1989</year>
<edition>3rd</edition>
<page-range>13-104</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[New York ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[American Council on Education and Macmillan]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<label>11</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Anderson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Messick]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Social Competency in Young Children]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Dev Psychol]]></source>
<year>1974</year>
<volume>10</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>282-93</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<label>12</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cronbach]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LJ]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Test validation]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Thorndike]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RL]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Educational Measurement]]></source>
<year>1971</year>
<edition>2nd</edition>
<page-range>443-507</page-range><publisher-loc><![CDATA[Washington DC ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[American Council on Education]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<label>13</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Miller]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[GE]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[The assessment of clinical skills/ competence/ performance]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acad Med]]></source>
<year>1990</year>
<numero>^ssuppl</numero>
<issue>^ssuppl</issue>
<supplement>suppl</supplement>
<page-range>S63-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<label>14</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[van der Vleuten]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CPM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Revisiting &#8216;Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes&#8217;]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<volume>50</volume>
<numero>9</numero>
<issue>9</issue>
<page-range>885-8</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<label>15</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Norman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Editorial-Inverting the pyramid]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Adv in Health Sci Educ]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>10</volume>
<page-range>85-8</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<label>16</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Moher]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Liberati]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Tetzlaff]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Altman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: the Prisma Statement]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[BMJ]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>6</volume>
<numero>7</numero>
<issue>7</issue>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<label>17</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cook]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[West]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>46</volume>
<numero>10</numero>
<issue>10</issue>
<page-range>943-52</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<label>18</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Azer]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[The Top-Cited Articles in Medical education: A Bibliometric Analysis]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acad Med]]></source>
<year>2015</year>
<volume>90</volume>
<numero>8</numero>
<issue>8</issue>
<page-range>1-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<label>19</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Harden]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Outcome-based Education: the future is today]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Teach]]></source>
<year>2007</year>
<volume>29</volume>
<numero>7</numero>
<issue>7</issue>
<page-range>625-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<label>20</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ten Cate]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[O]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Entrustability of professional activities and competency-based training]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>39</volume>
<numero>12</numero>
<issue>12</issue>
<page-range>1176-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<label>21</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Royal]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[KD]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Four tenets of modern validity theory for medical education assessment and evaluation]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Adv Med Educ Pract]]></source>
<year>2017</year>
<volume>8</volume>
<page-range>567-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<label>22</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Govaerts]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Van der Vleuten]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Validity in work-based assessment: expanding our horizons]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>47</volume>
<numero>12</numero>
<issue>12</issue>
<page-range>1164-74</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<label>23</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cook]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Beckman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Current Concepts in validity and reliability for psychometrics Instruments: Theory and Applications]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Am J Med]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>119</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>166.e7-16</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24">
<label>24</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sireci]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SG]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[On the validity of useless tests]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy &amp; Practices]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<volume>23</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>226-35</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25">
<label>25</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cook]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Irby]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sullivan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ludmerer]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[KM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[American Medical Education 100 Years after the Flexner report]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[N Engl J Med]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>355</volume>
<numero>13</numero>
<issue>13</issue>
<page-range>1339-44</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<label>26</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cronbach]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gleser]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[GC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Nanda]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Rajaratnam]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[The dependability of behavioral measurements: theory of generalizability for scores and profiles]]></source>
<year>1972</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[New York ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Wiley]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B27">
<label>27</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bleakly]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Broadening conceptions of learning in medical education: the message from teamworking]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>40</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>150-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B28">
<label>28</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Souza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sansevero]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Introducing early clinical experience in the curriculum]]></article-title>
<person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bin Abdulrahman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Routledge international handbook of Medical Education]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[New York ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Routledge]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B29">
<label>29</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Norcini]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Work based assessment]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[BMJ]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>326</volume>
<numero>7392</numero>
<issue>7392</issue>
<page-range>753-5</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B30">
<label>30</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hodghes]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Assessment in the post-psychometric era: learning to love the subjective and collective]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Teach]]></source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>35</volume>
<numero>7</numero>
<issue>7</issue>
<page-range>564-8</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B31">
<label>31</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ginsburg]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[McIlroy]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Oulanova]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[O]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Eva]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Regehr]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Toward authentic clinical evaluation: Pitfalls in the pursuit of competency]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acad Med]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>85</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>780-6</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B32">
<label>32</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Shuwirth]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[van der Vleuten]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CPM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[A plea for new psychometric models in educational assessment]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>40</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>296-300</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B33">
<label>33</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cook]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DA]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kuper]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hatala]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ginsburg]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SA]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[When Assessment Data Are Words: Validity Evidence for Qualitative Educational Assessments]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acad Med]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<volume>91</volume>
<numero>10</numero>
<issue>10</issue>
<page-range>1359-69</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B34">
<label>34</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Mann]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[KV]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Theoretical perspectives in Medical education: past experiences and future possibilites]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2011</year>
<volume>45</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>60-8</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B35">
<label>35</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Massoth]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Röder]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ohlenburg]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hessler]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zarbock]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pöpping]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DM]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[High-fidelity is not superior to low-fidelity simulation but leads to overconfidence in medical students]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[BMC Medical Education]]></source>
<year>2019</year>
<volume>19</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>29</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B36">
<label>36</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Schmuckler]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[MA]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[What is ecological validity? A dimensional Analysis]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Infancy]]></source>
<year>2001</year>
<volume>2</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>419-36</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B37">
<label>37</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sturman]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[MC]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cheramie]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[RA]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cashen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[LH]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[The impact of job complexity and performance measurement on the temporal consistency, stability, and test-retest reliability of employee job performance ratings]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[J Appl Psychol]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>90</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>269-83</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B38">
<label>38</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cook]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DA]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zendejas]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hamstra]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[SJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hatala]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Brydges]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[What counts as validity evidence? Examples and prevalence in a systematic review of simulation-based assessment]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Adv in Health Sci Educ]]></source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>19</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>233-50</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B39">
<label>39</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Pugh]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[DM]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Wood]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[TJ]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Boulet]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[JR]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Assessing Procedural Competence: validity considerations]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Simulation in health care]]></source>
<year>2015</year>
<volume>10</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>288-94</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B40">
<label>40</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gulliksen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Intrinsic validity]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[American Psychologist]]></source>
<year>1950</year>
<volume>5</volume>
<numero>10</numero>
<issue>10</issue>
<page-range>511-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B41">
<label>41</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Marceau]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gallagher]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Young]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[St-Onge]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Validity as a social imperative for assessment in health professions education: a concept analysis]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Med Educ]]></source>
<year>2018</year>
<volume>52</volume>
<numero>6</numero>
<issue>6</issue>
<page-range>641-53</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B42">
<label>42</label><nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Koretz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Measuring up: What Educational Testing Really tell Us]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cambridge MA ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Harvard University Press]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
