Standards for reporting quantitative research in health professions education: a synthesis of recommendations

PURPOSE: Consensus recommendations and harmonized guidelines for reporting quantitative research in health professions education (HPE) research are lacking. This study synthesizes available quantitative reporting recommendations and guidelines to present a harmonized framework and derive quantitative standards for reporting HPE research. METHOD: The authors identified existing standards, recommendations, and guidelines from peer-reviewed scientific journals in medicine, education, and social sciences by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Google from August 2006 through April 2025. The authors also requested input from experts in HPE (scholars and journal editors) via electronic communication over 6 months (November 2024 to April 2025). The articles identified were then used to synthesize and generate an initial list of standards for reporting quantitative research in HPE. Two authors reviewed each article to rate its alignment with HPE research. All authors independently evaluated the full list of standards and discussed them as a group for their relevance and alignment for reporting in HPE; all authors also made recommendations for each standard (to report as is, report but modify, or drop). The group subsequently reviewed and collectively reached consensus on the final set of quantitative reporting standards. RESULTS: The authors reviewed a total of 34 articles, with 19 identified as having alignment with HPE quantitative research standards. Mean interrater agreement among author pairs was 98% (kappa = .96). Authors initially generated 40 reporting standards, of which 18 (45%) were modified and 1 (3%) was identified to be dropped. The final set of quantitative guidelines consisted of 39 standards, with each standard nested in one of 28 topic areas. CONCLUSIONS: The quantitative reporting standards identified in this study provide guidance to ensure rigor in reporting expectations for HPE research. These standards may also facilitate critical appraisal of articles and enhance the quality and impact of quantitative HPE research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Academic Medicine
Published
2026-03-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/acamed/wvag097
Primary Topic
Innovations in Medical Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Standards for reporting quantitative research in health professions education: a synthesis of recommendations

Laura Weiss Roberts, Jonathan M. Amiel, Gustavo A. Patiño, Colin P. West et al.
Academic Medicine
Innovations in Medical Education
article

Standards for reporting quantitative research in health professions education: a synthesis of recommendations

Laura Weiss Roberts, Jonathan M. Amiel, Gustavo A. Patiño, Colin P. West, Yoon Soo Park
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Consensus recommendations and harmonized guidelines for reporting quantitative research in health professions education (HPE) research are lacking. This study synthesizes available quantitative reporting recommendations and guidelines to present a harmonized framework and derive quantitative standards for reporting HPE research. METHOD: The authors identified existing standards, recommendations, and guidelines from peer-reviewed scientific journals in medicine, education, and social sciences by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Google from August 2006 through April 2025. The authors also requested input from experts in HPE (scholars and journal editors) via electronic communication over 6 months (November 2024 to April 2025). The articles identified were then used to synthesize and generate an initial list of standards for reporting quantitative research in HPE. Two authors reviewed each article to rate its alignment with HPE research. All authors independently evaluated the full list of standards and discussed them as a group for their relevance and alignment for reporting in HPE; all authors also made recommendations for each standard (to report as is, report but modify, or drop). The group subsequently reviewed and collectively reached consensus on the final set of quantitative reporting standards. RESULTS: The authors reviewed a total of 34 articles, with 19 identified as having alignment with HPE quantitative research standards. Mean interrater agreement among author pairs was 98% (kappa = .96). Authors initially generated 40 reporting standards, of which 18 (45%) were modified and 1 (3%) was identified to be dropped. The final set of quantitative guidelines consisted of 39 standards, with each standard nested in one of 28 topic areas. CONCLUSIONS: The quantitative reporting standards identified in this study provide guidance to ensure rigor in reporting expectations for HPE research. These standards may also facilitate critical appraisal of articles and enhance the quality and impact of quantitative HPE research.

Academic Medicine
Mayo Clinic (US), Western Michigan University (US), Illinois College (US), University of Illinois Chicago (US), University of Chicago Medical Center (US), Presbyterian Hospital (US), Stanford Health Care (US), Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US), Stanford Medicine (US), Mayo Clinic in Florida (US), Stanford University (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Innovations in Medical Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.