Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol

Education programmes on performance-based... | HRB Open Research dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); const cookieDomain = window.location.hostname; const tld = buildTLD(); function buildTLD() { const domainParts = cookieDomain.split('.'); while (domainParts.length > 2) { domainParts.shift(); } return domainParts.join('.'); } function deleteCookie(cookieName) { if (!cookieName) { return; } const cookiePath = (cookieName.startsWith('retraction_warning_') || cookieName.startsWith('version_warning_')) ? '/articles/' + cookieName : '/'; // Yes, these three slightly different ways to try and remove cookies are necessary document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; domain=' + cookieDomain + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; domain=.' + tld + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; document.cookie = cookieName + '=; path=' + cookiePath + '; expires=Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:01 GMT;'; } function deleteGroupCookies(group) { if (!group) { return; } const domainData = OneTrust.GetDomainData(), cookies = domainData.Groups.filter(cookieGroup => cookieGroup.OptanonGroupId === group)[0].Cookies; cookies.forEach(cookie => deleteCookie(cookie.Name)); } function OptanonWrapper() { const cookieConsentGroups = []; for (group of OneTrust.GetDomainData().Groups) { cookieConsentGroups.push(group.OptanonGroupId); } OneTrust.OnConsentChanged(function(e) { const cookieConsentActiveGroups = OnetrustActiveGroups.split(',').filter(activeGroup => activeGroup); cookieConsentGroups.forEach(group => { if (!cookieConsentActiveGroups.includes(group)) { deleteGroupCookies(group); }; }); }); } window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://hrbopenresearch.org/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'HRB'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); Skip to content HRB Open Research file_upload Submit your research search clear search menu close clear Search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Data Guidelines Prepublication Checks Production Process Article Processing Charges Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers National Steering Group Policies Glossary FAQs Contact Blog My Account Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11" }, "headline": "Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A...", "datePublished": "2023-02-07T17:27:52", "dateModified": "2025-05-06T15:55:32", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Lucy Alpine" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Emer Barrett" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Julie Broderick" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "David Mockler" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Anne O'Connor" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "HRB Open Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/img/AMP/HRB_image.png", "height": 566, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/img/AMP/HRB_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 127 }, "description": " Background Performance-based assessment (PBA) is a complex process undertaken in the workplace by healthcare practitioners known as clinical educators, who assist universities in determining health professional students’ readiness for independent practice. Preparing healthcare professionals for PBA is considered essential to ensuring the quality of the assessment process in the clinical learning environment. A preliminary search of the literature indicated a paucity of research guiding the development of education programmes that support practice educators to understand and implement PBA. Objective The aim of this scoping review is to investigate and describe education programmes delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators, to develop PBA knowledge and skills. Methods This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for conducting scoping reviews. Electronic databases relevant to this research topic will be searched including, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science and CINAHL and other targeted databases for grey literature. Studies that include PBA as the main focus or a component of the education programmes, of any format, delivered to clinical educators in allied health and nursing will be included. Studies may report the design and/or implementation and/or evaluation of PBA education programmes. Relevant English language publications will be sought from January 2000 to October 2022. Two reviewers will screen all titles and abstracts against the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and publications deemed relevant will be eligible for full text screening, confirming appropriateness for inclusion in the scoping review. Data will be charted to create a table of the results, supported a by narrative summary of the findings in line with the review objectives. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2", "name": "Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health..." } } ] } Home Browse Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Alpine L, Barrett E, Broderick J et al. Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Study Protocol Revised Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] Lucy Alpine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7427-8748 1 , Emer Barrett https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3199-6870 1 , Julie Broderick https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2572-6479 1 , David Mockler https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6171-8751 2 , Anne O'Connor 3 Lucy Alpine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7427-8748 1 , Emer Barrett https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3199-6870 1 , [...] Julie Broderick https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2572-6479 1 , David Mockler https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6171-8751 2 , Anne O'Connor 3 PUBLISHED 12 Jan 2024 Author details Author details 1 Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, Dublin, D08W9RT, Ireland 2 John Sterne Library, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, Dublin, D08W9RT, Ireland 3 Munster Physiotherapy Clinic, Limerick, V94R9VW, Ireland Lucy Alpine Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Emer Barrett Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Julie Broderick Roles: Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing David Mockler Roles: Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization Anne O'Connor Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS Abstract Background Performance-based assessment (PBA) is a complex process undertaken in the workplace by healthcare practitioners known as clinical educators, who assist universities in determining health professional students’ readiness for independent practice. Preparing healthcare professionals for PBA is considered essential to ensuring the quality of the assessment process in the clinical learning environment. A preliminary search of the literature indicated a paucity of research guiding the development of education programmes that support practice educators to understand and implement PBA. Objective The aim of this scoping review is to investigate and describe education programmes delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators, to develop PBA knowledge and skills. Methods This review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology for conducting scoping reviews. Electronic databases relevant to this research topic will be searched including, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE (Ovid), Web of Science and CINAHL and other targeted databases for grey literature. Studies that include PBA as the main focus or a component of the education programmes, of any format, delivered to clinical educators in allied health and nursing will be included. Studies may report the design and/or implementation and/or evaluation of PBA education programmes. Relevant English language publications will be sought from January 2000 to October 2022. Two reviewers will screen all titles and abstracts against the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and publications deemed relevant will be eligible for full text screening, confirming appropriateness for inclusion in the scoping review. Data will be charted to create a table of the results, supported a by narrative summary of the findings in line with the review objectives. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords performance-based assessment, education/training programmes, clinical educators Corresponding Author(s) Lucy Alpine ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: Lucy Alpine Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2024 Alpine L et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Alpine L, Barrett E, Broderick J et al. Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.2 ) First published: 07 Feb 2023, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.1 ) Latest published: 06 May 2025, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.3 ) Revised Amendments from Version 1 An explanation regarding how Performance-Based Assessment is used differently in allied health/nursing versus medical education has been added to the 'Introduction' section which forms the basis for exclusion of medicine from the scoping review. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Clarification regarding not including 'key findings/impact of PBA education programmes' as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022) is outlined in response to the second reviewer. An explanation regarding how Performance-Based Assessment is used differently in allied health/nursing versus medical education has been added to the 'Introduction' section which forms the basis for exclusion of medicine from the scoping review. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Clarification regarding not including 'key findings/impact of PBA education programmes' as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022) is outlined in response to the second reviewer. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Lindy L. McAllister See the authors' detailed response to the review by Yvonne Finn See the authors' detailed response to the review by Susanne Friis Søndergaard READ REVIEWER RESPONSES  There is a newer version of this article available. Suppress this message for one day. Introduction Assessment of health professional students during work-based placements, also known as performance-based assessment (PBA), refers to the appraisal process conducted during clinical placements, and establishes students’ readiness for independent professional practice 1 . PBA determines health professional competence 2 , providing evidence of students’ abilities to care for patients in a real, uncontrolled clinical learning environment 3 . This assessment process aligns with effective outcome-based education, where students are required to achieve standardised professional competencies in order to graduate as competent clinicians 2 . Preliminary searches of relevant literature highlighted a paucity of evidence-based education programmes for clinical educators. Clinical educators are healthcare practitioners primarily involved in service delivery, who undertake student supervision and PBA in the workplace 4 . Titles used to describe health professionals who undertake this education role include practice educator, preceptor, mentor, fieldwork educator, clinical teacher and clinical educator 5 – 8 . For consistency, the term ‘clinical educator’ will be used throughout this protocol. Current literature in this area highlights challenges with PBA, citing inter and intra-rater reliability and knowledge of assessment processes as the greatest difficulties 9 – 12 . Clinical educators who are deficient in knowledge, skills and confidence for this role, may potentially compromise the PBA decision-making process, thereby casting doubt on a graduate’s credentials as a safe competent practitioner. Thus, exploration of current opportunities available for health professionals to address their educational needs in this area is most important 6 , 13 , 14 . Assessment in the clinical environment is a complex process open to many challenges and influenced by several factors including the assessor, the clinical learning environment and the assessment task 9 , 11 , 15 . Considerable responsibility is placed on these clinicians, as PBA often determines progression through the programme and may contribute significantly to the overall grade awarded to the student 16 , 17 . Dynamics impacting PBA relating to the assessors may include, variation in interpretation of the task and how it is judged 18 , differences in understanding of the assessment criteria 19 , and navigating the complex student-clinician relationship, where assessors act as both mentor and examiner 9 , 18 . Other relevant influences may include potential lack of commitment to the assessment process by clinical educators due to it been seen as a non-service related activity 20 , and cognitive or cultural biases 11 , 18 . In the clinical learning environment, issues such as time pressures 21 , the multiple demanding roles of the clinician 1 and the uncertain nature of the clinical setting, often presenting complex learning opportunities 11 , also present challenges. Assessment tasks may be viewed as problematic, requiring assessors to convert an observed performance into a numerical score 1 , 22 , with the added challenge of precise recall of a performance, due to the time lapse between observation and actual grading 22 . Furthermore, these difficulties may be heightened when a clinical educator is supervising and grading an underperforming student 23 . Thus, professional development to support clinical educators to carry out their role as assessors is critical to ensure the quality of work-based education and assessment 6 , 9 , 16 . There is some evidence to suggest that universities provide education programmes to induct new practice educators into their role, and more advanced programmes for experienced educators, to grow their teaching and assessment skills 7 , 14 , 15 , 24 , 25 . Programmes are delivered mainly through formal instructional approaches such as university-based workshops or online e-learning units, which may include education on implementing PBA 15 , 24 – 26 . However, certification requirements for these programmes are inconsistent and no specific guidance in relation to the format, content or frequency of PBA education is recommended 10 , 27 , 28 . The majority of research related to PBA education for healthcare professional is situated in medical education 21 , 29 , 30 , with preliminary searches suggesting limited studies for allied health professions and nursing 25 , 31 – 33 . In medicine, the literature on PBA spans both pre-qualification and post qualification programmes, where the implementation of PBA often differs from that applied in allied heath/nursing education. During medical rotations, students are generally under the supervision of clinical educators for short periods of time 34 , 35 , and commonly use assessment tools such as the Mini-Clinical Examination Exercise (Mini-CEX) and Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS), applying only a discrete number of assessment criteria 3 , 4 , 36 , 37 . Clinical performance is evaluated at distinct pre-arranged timepoints, often planned or identified by the student, and verbal and/or written feedback is not always included 38 , 39 . These assessment approaches and tools may not provide an integrated view of overall patient management by the student or reflect care provided over time 35 , 36 . In nursing and allied health education, PBA is generally applied as a continuous assessment process over a prolonged period of time, for example 6 to 12 weeks 40 , 41 . Students are often supervised by one/two educators for the duration of the placement and work closely together under their supervision 40 . PBA generally consists of multiple daily observations of the student, which can include reviewing student’s assessments and clinical reasoning documentation, together with observation of their professional and communication skills 42 , 43 . PBA tools are frequently used for both formative and summative feedback, with written feedback informing the dialogue regarding the students’ performance 44 . Differences in supervision and assessment practices may suggest educational needs for clinical educators are also different, depending on how the PBA assessment is applied and their clinical learning environment. Despite the difference in how PBA is applied, a preliminary search of the research suggests similar approaches are used. In medicine, studies frequently use interactive workshops and video vignette of students’ clinical performances based on teaching approaches such as ‘Performance Dimension Training’ or ‘Frame of Reference’ training 21 , 29 , 30 . These studies have shown a positive impact on participants assessment confidence, skills and knowledge, with more variable success for grading accuracy and reliability. A small number of recent allied health studies using similar approaches, highlighted the benefits of interactive dialogue between assessors as part of the decision-making process, resulting in more transparent assessment processes, and also improved rating accuracy of assessors 15 , 45 . A preliminary search identified one systematic review specifically associated with professional development of clinical educators. Milne et al ., (2011) reviewed evidence-based training for clinical supervisors in mental health professions, identifying 20 different topics provided in education programmes, however assessment was not explicitly reported as a component of training in any of these studies 25 . A further systematic review addressing the issues and concerns related to learning and assessment in the clinical learning environment 14 , and a more recent scoping review exploring the factors needed to support clinical educators in the workplace 46 , do not specifically addresses PBA education, however both highlight the requirement for professional development in assessment practices. A search for existing scoping and systematic review protocols related to education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health or nursing professionals was conducted in MEDLINE (Ovid), Best Evidence Medical Education, Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Evidence Synthesis and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in July 2022, producing no protocols on this topic. Preparing clinical educators to implement PBA and develop expertise as an assessor requires on-going education and experience 46 , 47 . In addition, there is mounting pressure on universities from accreditation and regulatory bodies to ensure clinical educators are fit for their role, which includes the provision of credible and defensible PBA evaluations to safeguard the public. Therefore, it is a timely and essential task to investigate the breath and scope of existing literature regarding the education provided to clinical educators to deliver PBA. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate and describe education programmes delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators, to develop PBA knowledge and skills. Methods This proposed scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review guidelines 48 , informed by the Arskey and O’Malley framework 49 , with consideration of the recommendations from Levac et al ., 50 , Duadt et al ., 51 and Peters et al ., 2022 52 . Rationale for scoping review Scoping reviews are an effective method to establish the extent of the available research on a particular topic by exploring diverse international research sources, clarifying key concepts and identifying gaps in the knowledge on a specific research topic 51 , 53 . In addition, given the limited yield of literature from the initial search and investigative nature of this research, a scoping review is well positioned to identify any gaps in the research. Research question, objectives and purpose This study protocol will address the following question: what is known about education programmes used to develop PBA knowledge and skills for clinical educators in allied health and nursing? The review objectives are as follows: To explore the extent, range and nature of the literature on PBA education programmes provided to allied health and nursing professionals To chart specific characteristics related to the context, target population, format, aim, instructional methods/teaching strategies, content, pedagogical approaches, evaluation and key findings or educational impact of these programmes To collate, describe and summarise the available evidence on PBA education programmes, and identify any gaps in the existing research The purpose of the review is to explore and describe education programmes delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators, to develop PBA knowledge and skills. Inclusion criteria The search strategy was constructed using the Population-Concept-Context framework to guide the eligibility criteria. An overview of the inclusion and exclusion criteria are outlined in Table 1 . Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria. Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria • Studies that report the design and/or implementation and/or evaluation of PBA education programmes for allied health and nursing clinical educators supervising pre-qualification dietetic, occupational therapy, nursing, optometry, orthoptic, physiotherapy, podiatry, psychology, radiography, radiation therapy, social workers and speech and language therapy students • Qualitative, quantitative, primary or mixed methods research studies of any design • Opinion pieces, reviews, conference abstracts that comment on PBA empirical research or have PBA education as the main focus • Grey literature retrieved from Google Scholar, ResearchGate, GreyLit and Open Grey • Full text papers or reports in the English language • Published after 1 st January 2000 to the 30 th of October 2022 • Professional development programmes targeting university academic staff or allied health professionals other than dietitians, occupational therapists, nursing, optometrists, orthoptists, physiotherapists, podiatrists, psychologists, radiographers, radiation therapists, social workers and speech and language therapists • Professional development programmes relating to clinical education that do not include a PBA component • General information regarding PBA on websites of individual allied health or nursing professional bodies, professional regulators, government education departments • Research papers or grey literature not written in English Participants The primary population of this review are clinical educators, described as clinicians who supervise pre-qualification students on clinical placements. Clinical educators may work in a part-time or full-time capacity and be employed across a wide range of workplaces providing healthcare to service users. This scoping review will consider studies that include clinical educators from the following health and social work professions: dietitians, occupational therapists, nursing, optometrists, orthoptists, physiotherapists, podiatrists, psychologists, radiographers, radiation therapists, social workers and speech and language therapists. Professions identified include those awarded a recognised professional entry-level qualification from universities and have work-based placements as an integral part of their programmes. Concept This scoping review is designed to explore PBA education programmes provided to allied health and nursing clinical educators who supervise pre-qualification students. Medical education programmes were not included as their assessment practice in clinical education differ considerably from allied health and nursing. These programmes may be designed, developed and delivered by academics with a practice education remit or dedicated discipline specific practice education staff. Education programmes must include PBA as the main focus or as a component of a programme, giving a clear description of the design and/or implementation and/or evaluation of the assessment aspect. All instructional methods or teaching strategies for programme delivery will be considered and may include but are not limited to, interactive workshops, didactic lectures, structured reflection opportunities, role-play or other simulation approaches, workplace observational coaching or other methods. Evaluation outcomes for the programmes will be pursued. Context PBA education programmes may be based in the university as a face-to-face event, or as a university e-learning virtual programme or facilitated in a clinical setting. Programmes may also vary in duration from single interventions completed over a number of hours or a single day, to more longitudinal programmes delivered over a defined period of time. Literature will be searched from the year 2000 recognising the growth in research and development in the area of work-based assessment in recent decades. There will be no limits on geographical location. Search strategy A professional librarian will be consulted to assist with developing comprehensive search strategies to identify relevant literature from a broad range of sources including electronic databases, reference lists and grey literature. Initial searches of EMBASE and PUBMED databases were undertaken in July 2022 to identify studies relevant to the research area. Keywords and index terms of the relevant studies were then used to create search strategies. The final EMBASE search strategy is outlined in Table 2 . Table 2. Search strategy for EMBASE. Search Query S1 (('performance based' OR 'workplace based' OR 'competency based' OR 'performance based') NEAR/3 assess*):ti,ab,kw S2 ('domains of competence' OR 'Competency-Based Education' OR 'Competency-Based assessment*' OR 'competency- based portfolio*' OR ‘assessment of competence’ OR 'frame of reference training' OR 'performance dimension training' OR 'behaviour observation training'):ti,ab,kw S3 #1 OR #2 S4 'allied health student'/exp OR 'allied health education'/exp S5 ('allied health' NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S6 ('audiology'/exp AND ('clinical competence'/exp AND 'curriculum'/exp AND 'education'/exp)) OR 'audiology student'/exp S7 (audiol* NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S8 ('dietetics'/exp AND ('clinical competence'/exp AND 'curriculum'/exp AND 'education'/exp)) OR 'dietetics education'/exp OR 'dietetics student'/exp S9 ((dietitian* OR dietetic*) NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)): ti,ab,kw S10 'nursing'/exp OR 'nursing student'/exp OR 'nursing education'/exp OR 'nursing practice'/exp S11 (Nurs* NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S12 'occupational therapy'/exp OR 'occupational therapy student'/exp OR 'occupational therapy education'/exp OR 'occupational therapy practice'/exp S13 ('occupational therap*' NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)): ti,ab,kw S14 (('optometry'/exp OR 'orthoptics'/exp) AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp)) OR 'optometry education'/exp S15 ((Optometr* OR orthoptics) NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S16 'physiotherapy'/exp OR 'physical therapy student'/exp OR 'physical therapy education'/exp OR 'physiotherapy practice'/exp S17 ((‘physical therap’ OR physiotherap*) NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S18 ('podiatry'/exp AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp)) OR 'podiatry education'/exp S19 (podiatr* NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S20 (('psychology'/exp OR 'psychologist'/exp) AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp)) OR 'psychology student'/exp OR 'psychology education'/exp S21 (Psycholog* NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S22 'radiotherapy'/exp AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp) S23 ((Radiotherap* OR 'radation therap*') NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S24 'Radiography'/exp AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp) S25 (Radiograph* NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S26 (('social work'/exp OR 'social worker'/exp OR 'social work practice'/exp) AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp)) OR 'social work student'/exp S27 (('social work' OR 'social care work') NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S28 ('speech language pathologist'/exp OR 'speech and language rehabilitation'/exp) AND ('student'/exp OR 'education'/exp OR 'learning'/exp OR 'clinical education'/exp) S29 (('speech language' OR 'speech and language' OR 'speech & language') NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S30 #4 OR #5 OR #6 OR #7 OR #8 OR #9 OR #10 OR #11 OR #12 OR #13 OR #14 OR #15 OR #16 OR #17 OR #18 OR #19 OR #20 OR #21 OR #22 OR #23 OR #24 OR #25 OR #26 OR #27 OR #28 OR #29 S31 'program development'/exp OR 'curriculum development'/exp OR 'course content'/exp OR 'education program'/exp OR 'tertiary education'/exp OR 'vocational education'/exp OR 'allied health education'/exp OR 'occupational therapy education'/exp OR 'physical therapy education'/exp OR 'teacher training'/exp OR 'program evaluation'/de S32 ((Program OR curricul* OR pilot*) NEAR/3 (develop* OR evaluat* OR design* OR create* OR initiate*)):ti,ab,kw S33 ((‘allied health’ OR ‘occupational therap*’ OR ‘physical therap’ OR physiotherap* OR dietitian* OR dietetic* OR ‘speech and language’) NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S34 ((‘allied health’ OR ‘occupational therap*’ OR ‘physical therap*’ OR physiotherap* OR dietitian* OR dietetic* OR ‘speech and language’) NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S35 ‘Train the trainer*’:ti,ab,kw S36 ((Student OR undergraduate* OR postgraduate*) NEAR/3 (educat* OR curricul* OR train* OR ‘clinical skill*’ OR competenc* OR evaluat* OR assess*)):ti,ab,kw S37 ((Teacher* OR instructor* OR clinician* OR mentor* OR faculty OR educator*) NEAR/3 (train* OR develop* OR skill* OR tool*)):ti,ab,kw S38 #31 OR #32 OR #33 OR #34 OR #35 OR #36 OR #37 S39 #3 AND #30 AND #38 A comprehensive search will be undertaken to identify relevant publications in the following databases: EMBASE , ERIC , MEDLINE (Ovid) , Web of Science and CINAHL . Bibliographies of relevant publications and review articles will be examined for further citations and checked for suitability using the eligibility criteria. A grey literature search will be undertaken using databases identified in the inclusion criteria. Websites of individual professional bodies, universities, professional regulator or government education departments will not be searched as this is beyond the resources of this research project, considering the breath of professions included in the review. The search will be iterative and any relevant additional terms, concepts or literature sources, emerging during the search, screening or selection processes, may be added to the search strategy as the review progresses 52 . Only publications in the English language will be included. Sources of evidence selection Following the searches, appropriate publications will be imported into Covidence , and any duplicates not already detected will be removed ( Abstrackr is a free open source alternative that can carry out similar functions to Covidence). To ensure reliability in selection, two reviewers will independently screen the title and abstract of a random sample of 20 retrieved articles, to ensure consistency between the reviewers regarding the eligibility criteria 52 . All records will then be screened by two reviewers, with titles and abstracts appraised against the inclusion/exclusion criteria 51 . Uncertainties or disputes related to the study selection will be discussed at scheduled meetings at the beginning, midpoint and final stages of the abstract review process 50 . Where an inclusion or exclusion decision cannot be agreed from the title or abstract, the full article will be screened. Publications deemed appropriate will be eligible for full text screening, by the two independent reviewers, confirming appropriateness for inclusion in the scoping review. Any disagreements will be resolved through discussion and consensus with a third reviewer. Data extraction Covidence will be used to manage citations and perform data extraction based on pre-determined data characteristics listed below. Initially, five to ten identified papers will be piloted by two reviewers to ensure agreement on data extraction characteristics and that the data fields are consistent with the research question 50 . During the review process, data fields may be further refined with any changes reported in the final review 49 , 54 . Any questions will be resolved by discussion to reach consensus. Where ambiguity or omissions exist, study authors will be contacted for further details. Data will be extracted by a single review author and verified by a second reviewer. As the purpose of this scoping review is focused on describing sources of evidence on a specific research topic, a risk of bias for source of evidence will not be included 49 , 52 . The following fields will be extracted from the included studies: 1. Author 2. Year of publication 3. Country of study 4. Healthcare profession 5. Size of study population 6. Format/type of programme 7. Location and duration of progamme 8. Overall aim or focus of the programme 9. Instructional methods/teaching strategies 10. Content of programme 11. Theoretical/conceptual framework/pedagogies underpinning teaching methods 12. Evaluation methods 13. Key findings/educational impact Data analysis and presentations The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review (PRIMSA-ScR) checklist will be followed for organisation of information and reporting 55 . A PRISMA flow diagram will be used to report the results of the literature search. This will include numbers of articles imported, duplicates identified, titles and abstracts screened, irrelevant studies removed, rationale for exclusion of articles and final full-text studies included for review 56 . To maintain transparency, any changes from the protocol will be reported in the scoping review report 52 . All data extracted will be mapped into tabular format, based on descriptive headings in the data extraction form, and accompanied by a narrative summary of the results in line with the review objectives. A comparison of allied health/nursing and medicine PBA education programmes will be included in the discussion. Study status At the time of publication of this review protocol, title and abstract screening were underway. Data availability No data are associated with this article. Acknowledgements An earlier version (preprint) of this article can be found on Open Science Framework: ‘ Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’ ( https://osf.io/sjxhf/ ). Faculty Opinions recommended References 1. Meyer IS, Louw A, Ernstzen D: Perceptions of physiotherapy clinical educators' dual roles as mentors and assessors: Influence on teaching-learning relationships. S Afr J Physiother. 2019; 75 (1): 468. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 2. Epstein RM, Hundert EM: Defining and assessing professional competence. JAMA. 2002; 287 (2): 226–35. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 3. Holmboe ES, Kogan JR: Observation in medical education: Time for a broader conversation? Fam Syst Health. 2018; 36 (1): 17–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 4. O'Connor A, Cantillon P, Parker M, et al. : Juggling roles and generating solutions; practice-based educators' perceptions of performance-based assessment of physiotherapy students. Physiotherapy. 2019; 105 (4): 446–52. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 5. O'Brien AT, McNeil K, Dawson A: The student experience of clinical supervision across health disciplines - Perspectives and remedies to enhance clinical placement. Nurse Educ Pract. 2019; 34 : 48–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 6. Quigley D, Loftus L, McGuire A, et al. : An optimal environment for placement learning: listening to the voices of speech and language therapy students. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2020; 55 (4): 506–19. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 7. McCarthy B, Murphy S: Preceptors' experiences of clinically educating and assessing undergraduate nursing students: an Irish context. J Nurs Manag. 2010; 18 (2): 234–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 8. Seale J, Gallagher C, Grisbrooke J: Fieldwork Educator Training: Design and Evaluation of an Educational Package. Br J Occup Ther. 1996; 59 (11): 529–34. Publisher Full Text 9. Seldomridge LA, Walsh CM: Waging the War on Clinical Grade Inflation: The Ongoing Quest. Nurse Educ. 2018; 43 (4): 178–82. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 10. Dudding CC, McCready V, Nunez LM, et al. : Clinical supervision in speech-language pathology and audiology in the United States: Development of a professional specialty. Clin Superv. 2017; 36 (2): 161–81. Publisher Full Text 11. Govaerts M, van der Vleuten CP: Validity in work-based assessment: expanding our horizons. Med Educ. 2013; 47 (12): 1164–74. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 12. Reubenson A, Ng L, Gucciardi DF: The Assessment of Physiotherapy Practice tool provides informative assessments of clinical and professional dimensions of student performance in undergraduate placements: a longitudinal validity and reliability study. J Physiother. 2020; 66 (2): 113–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 13. Newstead C, Johnston CL, Nisbet G, et al. : Physiotherapy clinical education in Australia: an exploration of clinical educator characteristics, confidence and training requirements. Aust Health Rev. 2019; 43 (6): 696–705. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 14. Wu XV, Enskär K, Pua LH, et al. : Clinical nurse leaders' and academics' perspectives in clinical assessment of final-year nursing students: A qualitative study. Nurs Health Sci. 2017; 19 (3): 287–93. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 15. Alpine LM, O'Connor A, McGuinness M, et al. : Performance-based assessment during clinical placement: Cross-sectional investigation of a training workshop for practice educators. Nurs Health Sci. 2021; 23 (1): 113–22. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 16. Heaslip V, Scammell JM: Failing underperforming students: the role of grading in practice assessment. Nurse Educ Pract. 2012; 12 (2): 95–100. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 17. O'Connor A, Cantillon P, McGarr O, et al. : Navigating the system: Physiotherapy student perceptions of performance-based assessment. Med Teach. 2018; 40 (9): 928–33. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 18. Yeates P, O'Neill P, Mann K, et al. : Seeing the same thing differently: mechanisms that contribute to assessor differences in directly-observed performance assessments. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2013; 18 (3): 325–41. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 19. Kilgour AJ: Assessment of competency in radiography students — a new approach. Radiographer. 2011; 58 (3): 32–7. Publisher Full Text 20. Cross V, Hicks C, Barwell F: Exploring the Gap between Evidence and Judgement: Using Video Vignettes for Practice-based Assessment of Physiotherapy Undergraduates. Assess Eval High Educ. 2001; 26 (3): 189–212. Publisher Full Text 21. Ogden PE, Edwards J, Howell M, et al. : The effect of two different faculty development interventions on third-year clerkship performance evaluations. Fam Med. 2008; 40 (5): 333–8. PubMed Abstract 22. Gingerich A, Regehr G, Eva KW: Rater-based assessments as social judgments: rethinking the etiology of rater errors. Acad Med. 2011; 86 (10 Suppl): S1–7. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 23. Duffy K, Hardicre J: Supporting failing students in practice. 1: Assessment. Nurs Times. 2007; 103 (47): 28–9. PubMed Abstract 24. Bacon R, Williams LT, Grealish L, et al. : Competency-based assessment for clinical supervisors: design-based research on a web-delivered program. JMIR Res Protoc. 2015; 4 (1): e26. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 25. Milne DL, Sheikh AI, Pattison S, et al. : Evidence-Based Training for Clinical Supervisors: A Systematic Review of 11 Controlled Studies. Clin Superv. 2011; 30 (1): 53–71. Publisher Full Text 26. Ferguson A, McAllister S, Lincoln M, et al. : Becoming familiar with competency-based student assessment: an evaluation of workshop outcomes. Int J Speech Lang Pathol. 2010; 12 (6): 545–54. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 27. Mallik M, McGowan B: Issues in practice based learning in nursing in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland: Results from a multi professional scoping exercise. Nurse Educ Today. 2007; 27 (1): 52–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 28. Duffy K, Gillies A: Supervision and assessment: the new Nursing and Midwifery Council standards. Nurs Manag (Harrow). 2018; 25 (3): 17–21. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 29. Holmboe ES, Hawkins RE, Huot SJ: Effects of training in direct observation of medical residents' clinical competence: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2004; 140 (11): 874–81. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 30. Kogan JR, Conforti LN, Bernabeo E, et al. : How faculty members experience workplace-based assessment rater training: a qualitative study. Med Educ. 2015; 49 (7): 692–708. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 31. Steinert Y, Mann K, Anderson B, et al. : A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to enhance teaching effectiveness: A 10-year update: BEME Guide No. 40. Med Teach. 2016; 38 (8): 769–86. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 32. Mikkonen K, Kuivila HM, Sjögren T, et al. : Social, health care and rehabilitation educators' competence in professional education-Empirical testing of a model. Health Soc Care Community. 2022; 30 (1): e75–e85. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 33. Harvey S, Spurr P, Sidebotham M, et al. : Describing and evaluating a foundational education/training program preparing nurses, midwives and other helping professionals as supervisors of clinical supervision using the Role Development Model. Nurse Educ Pract. 2020; 42 : 102671. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 34. Hemmer PA, Dadekian GA, Terndrup C, et al. : Regular Formal Evaluation Sessions are Effective as Frame-of-Reference Training for Faculty Evaluators of Clerkship Medical Students. J Gen Intern Med. 2015; 30 (9): 1313–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 35. Hanson JL, Rosenberg AA, Lane JL: Narrative descriptions should replace grades and numerical ratings for clinical performance in medical education in the United States. Front Psychol. 2013; 4 : 668. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 36. Regehr G, Eva K, Ginsburg S, et al. : Assessment in Postgraduate Medical Education: Trends and Issues in Assessment in the Workplace. 2011. Reference Source 37. Walsh E, Foley T, Sinnott C, et al. : Developing and piloting a resource for training assessors in use of the Mini-CEX (mini clinical evaluation exercise). Educ Prim Care. 2017; 28 (4): 243–245. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 38. Kogan JR, Hatala R, Hauer KE, et al. : Guidelines: The do's, don'ts and don't knows of direct observation of clinical skills in medical education. Perspect Med Educ. 2017; 6 (5): 286–305. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 39. Swanberg M, Woodson-Smith S, Pangaro L, et al. : Factors and Interactions Influencing Direct Observation: A Literature Review Guided by Activity Theory. Teach Learn Med. 2022; 34 (2): 155–166. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 40. Barrett EM, Belton A, Alpine LM: Supervision models in physiotherapy practice education: student and practice educator evaluations. Physiother Theory Pract. 2021; 37 (11): 1185–1198. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 41. Finstad I, Knutstad U, Havnes A, et al. : The paradox of an expected level: The assessment of nursing students during clinical practice – A qualitative study. Nurse Educ Pract. 2022; 61 : 103332. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 42. England A, Geers-van Gemeren S, Henner A, et al. : Clinical radiography education across Europe. Radiography (Lond). 2017; 23 Suppl 1 : S7–S15. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 43. Brown RA, Crookes PA: How do expert clinicians assess student nurses competency during workplace experience? A modified nominal group approach to devising a guidance package. Collegian. 2017; 24 (3): 219–225. Publisher Full Text 44. Myers K, Bilyeu C, Covington K, et al. : Clinical Teaching Competencies in Physical Therapist Education: A Modified Delphi Study. Phys Ther. 2022; 102 (7): pzac063. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 45. Bacon R, Holmes K, Palermo C: Exploring subjectivity in competency-based assessment judgements of assessors. Nutr Diet. 2017; 74 (4): 357–64. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 46. Tassoni D, Kent F, Simpson J, et al. : Supporting health professional educators in the workplace: A scoping review. Med Teach. 2023; 45 (1): 49–57. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 47. Gorman CA, Rentsch JR: Evaluating frame-of-reference rater training effectiveness using performance schema accuracy. J Appl Psychol. 2009; 94 (5): 1336–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 48. Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, et al. : Chapter 11: scoping reviews (2020 version). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI. 2020; 2020 . Publisher Full Text 49. Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Method. 2005; 8 (1): 19–32. Publisher Full Text 50. Levac D, Colquhoun H, O'Brien KK: Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010; 5 : 69. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 51. Daudt HML, van Mossel C, Scott SJ: Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013; 13 (1): 48. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 52. Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, et al. : Best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols. JBI Evid Synth. 2022; 20 (4): 953–68. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 53. Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, et al. : Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018; 18 (1): 143. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text 54. Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, et al. : Scoping reviews. Joanna Briggs Institute reviewer’s manual. 2017; 2015 : 1–24. Reference Source 55. Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. : Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015; 350 : g7647. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text 56. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. : The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021; 372 : n71. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 07 Feb 2023 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, Dublin, D08W9RT, Ireland 2 John Sterne Library, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, Dublin, D08W9RT, Ireland 3 Munster Physiotherapy Clinic, Limerick, V94R9VW, Ireland Lucy Alpine Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Emer Barrett Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Julie Broderick Roles: Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing David Mockler Roles: Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization Anne O'Connor Roles: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (3) version 3 Revised Published: 06 May 2025, 6:11 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.3 version 2 Revised Published: 12 Jan 2024, 6:11 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.2 version 1 Published: 07 Feb 2023, 6:11 https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.1 Copyright © 2024 Alpine L et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics VIEWS $counts.viewCount downloads Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Alpine L, Barrett E, Broderick J et al. Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13669.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 12 Jan 2024 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Søndergaard SF. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r44454 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2#referee-response-44454 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 03 Feb 2025 Susanne Friis Søndergaard , Viborg Regional Hospital, Aarhus University, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r44454 Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to ... Continue reading READ ALL Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Nursing, Education, Hospital design, Advanced nursing practice, Perioperative nursing I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Søndergaard SF. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r44454 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2#referee-response-44454 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 03 Jun 2025 Lucy Alpine , Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland 03 Jun 2025 Author Response Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: ... Continue reading Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: Susanne Friis Sꬾndergaard Review comment 1: Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. Response: Thank you for the recognition of the clearly stated aims of the study. In response to your suggestions the research team have reviewed the background section thoroughly and added subheadings to assist the structure and flow of this section. Heading 1: Background Heading 2: The Challenges and Complexities of Performance-Based Assessment Heading 3: Application of Performance-Based Assessment in Healthcare Professional Education Heading 4: Education Programmes for Performance-Based Assessment Heading 5: Rationale for a Scoping Review We have merged some of the sections and restructured the sequence of the paragraphs in the background section to assist with clarity. In addition, we have restructured and added supplementary sentences to the rationale section, which summarises the reasons for scoping review and provides a clearer connection to the research question. Review comment 3: I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open Grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Response: Many thanks for your comments. The research team developed a Grey literature search strategy which provides a more in-depth description of the search strategies and terms used. This strategy is now referenced in the ‘Search Strategy’ section of the protocol and has been deposited in a repository in line with the HRB article guidelines. The GreyLit database was no longer available when the search strategies were carried out. However, the other databases have yielded a significant volume and range of literature, and we are confident they captured relevant research on this topic from the Grey literature. We have removed GreyLit from Table 1 in the protocol. Review comment 4: Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Response: The authors details are available in Version 1 publication in line with HRB requirements: Authors roles: Alpine L : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Barrett E : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Broderick J : Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Mockler D : Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization O'Connor A : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Review comment 5 : Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: Susanne Friis Sꬾndergaard Review comment 1: Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. Response: Thank you for the recognition of the clearly stated aims of the study. In response to your suggestions the research team have reviewed the background section thoroughly and added subheadings to assist the structure and flow of this section. Heading 1: Background Heading 2: The Challenges and Complexities of Performance-Based Assessment Heading 3: Application of Performance-Based Assessment in Healthcare Professional Education Heading 4: Education Programmes for Performance-Based Assessment Heading 5: Rationale for a Scoping Review We have merged some of the sections and restructured the sequence of the paragraphs in the background section to assist with clarity. In addition, we have restructured and added supplementary sentences to the rationale section, which summarises the reasons for scoping review and provides a clearer connection to the research question. Review comment 3: I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open Grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Response: Many thanks for your comments. The research team developed a Grey literature search strategy which provides a more in-depth description of the search strategies and terms used. This strategy is now referenced in the ‘Search Strategy’ section of the protocol and has been deposited in a repository in line with the HRB article guidelines. The GreyLit database was no longer available when the search strategies were carried out. However, the other databases have yielded a significant volume and range of literature, and we are confident they captured relevant research on this topic from the Grey literature. We have removed GreyLit from Table 1 in the protocol. Review comment 4: Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Response: The authors details are available in Version 1 publication in line with HRB requirements: Authors roles: Alpine L : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Barrett E : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Broderick J : Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Mockler D : Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization O'Connor A : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Review comment 5 : Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 03 Jun 2025 Lucy Alpine , Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland 03 Jun 2025 Author Response Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: ... Continue reading Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: Susanne Friis Sꬾndergaard Review comment 1: Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. Response: Thank you for the recognition of the clearly stated aims of the study. In response to your suggestions the research team have reviewed the background section thoroughly and added subheadings to assist the structure and flow of this section. Heading 1: Background Heading 2: The Challenges and Complexities of Performance-Based Assessment Heading 3: Application of Performance-Based Assessment in Healthcare Professional Education Heading 4: Education Programmes for Performance-Based Assessment Heading 5: Rationale for a Scoping Review We have merged some of the sections and restructured the sequence of the paragraphs in the background section to assist with clarity. In addition, we have restructured and added supplementary sentences to the rationale section, which summarises the reasons for scoping review and provides a clearer connection to the research question. Review comment 3: I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open Grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Response: Many thanks for your comments. The research team developed a Grey literature search strategy which provides a more in-depth description of the search strategies and terms used. This strategy is now referenced in the ‘Search Strategy’ section of the protocol and has been deposited in a repository in line with the HRB article guidelines. The GreyLit database was no longer available when the search strategies were carried out. However, the other databases have yielded a significant volume and range of literature, and we are confident they captured relevant research on this topic from the Grey literature. We have removed GreyLit from Table 1 in the protocol. Review comment 4: Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Response: The authors details are available in Version 1 publication in line with HRB requirements: Authors roles: Alpine L : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Barrett E : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Broderick J : Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Mockler D : Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization O'Connor A : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Review comment 5 : Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: Susanne Friis Sꬾndergaard Review comment 1: Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. Response: Thank you for the recognition of the clearly stated aims of the study. In response to your suggestions the research team have reviewed the background section thoroughly and added subheadings to assist the structure and flow of this section. Heading 1: Background Heading 2: The Challenges and Complexities of Performance-Based Assessment Heading 3: Application of Performance-Based Assessment in Healthcare Professional Education Heading 4: Education Programmes for Performance-Based Assessment Heading 5: Rationale for a Scoping Review We have merged some of the sections and restructured the sequence of the paragraphs in the background section to assist with clarity. In addition, we have restructured and added supplementary sentences to the rationale section, which summarises the reasons for scoping review and provides a clearer connection to the research question. Review comment 3: I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open Grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Response: Many thanks for your comments. The research team developed a Grey literature search strategy which provides a more in-depth description of the search strategies and terms used. This strategy is now referenced in the ‘Search Strategy’ section of the protocol and has been deposited in a repository in line with the HRB article guidelines. The GreyLit database was no longer available when the search strategies were carried out. However, the other databases have yielded a significant volume and range of literature, and we are confident they captured relevant research on this topic from the Grey literature. We have removed GreyLit from Table 1 in the protocol. Review comment 4: Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Response: The authors details are available in Version 1 publication in line with HRB requirements: Authors roles: Alpine L : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Barrett E : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Broderick J : Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Mockler D : Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization O'Connor A : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Review comment 5 : Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: McAllister LL. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r37759 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2#referee-response-37759 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 30 Jan 2024 Lindy L. McAllister , Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r37759 The authors have satisfactorily revised the paper to explain why they ... Continue reading READ ALL The authors have satisfactorily revised the paper to explain why they excluded literature from medicine in their review, and corrected typos. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT McAllister LL. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r37759 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2#referee-response-37759 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 07 Feb 2023 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Finn Y. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r36233 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v1#referee-response-36233 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 18 Oct 2023 Yvonne Finn , University of Galway, Galway, Ireland Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r36233 Rationale: The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Can ... Continue reading READ ALL Rationale: The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Research question: The research question is clearly stated. Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? This may be challenging to interpret in view of the types of studies listed in the inclusion criteria and the authors’ intention not to do a critical appraisal of included studies. A focus on the impact of interventions is not usually included in scoping reviews for these reasons. At the same time, it is appropriate to report/summarise the key findings as they relate to the scoping review research question. Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Partly Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Finn Y. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r36233 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v1#referee-response-36233 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 15 Jan 2024 Lucy Alpine , Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland 15 Jan 2024 Author Response Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing ... Continue reading Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review Comment 9: Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/ or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 2. As outlined, we have included further details in the Introduction section of the protocol. Review comment 10: Research question - The research question is clearly stated. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 1 1: Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 12: Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? Response: Thank you for your comment. The key findings/impact of PBA education programmes are not included as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022). The broad objective of this scoping review is to investigate and describe the range and characteristics of PBA programmes, identifying commonalities and differences. The review will include studies of all designs, including grey literature and without a specific focus on RCTs, the effectiveness of PBA programmes cannot therefore be specifically evaluated. However, key findings and educational impact have been included in the data extraction fields and may assist with the objectives of recognising gaps in the existing research and determining the potential value of a full systematic review on this topic (Levac et al, 2010). Review comment 13: Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 4. Review comments 14: Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Response: Thank you for your comment. We have corrected the text. Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review Comment 9: Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/ or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 2. As outlined, we have included further details in the Introduction section of the protocol. Review comment 10: Research question - The research question is clearly stated. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 1 1: Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 12: Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? Response: Thank you for your comment. The key findings/impact of PBA education programmes are not included as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022). The broad objective of this scoping review is to investigate and describe the range and characteristics of PBA programmes, identifying commonalities and differences. The review will include studies of all designs, including grey literature and without a specific focus on RCTs, the effectiveness of PBA programmes cannot therefore be specifically evaluated. However, key findings and educational impact have been included in the data extraction fields and may assist with the objectives of recognising gaps in the existing research and determining the potential value of a full systematic review on this topic (Levac et al, 2010). Review comment 13: Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 4. Review comments 14: Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Response: Thank you for your comment. We have corrected the text. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 15 Jan 2024 Lucy Alpine , Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland 15 Jan 2024 Author Response Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing ... Continue reading Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review Comment 9: Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/ or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 2. As outlined, we have included further details in the Introduction section of the protocol. Review comment 10: Research question - The research question is clearly stated. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 1 1: Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 12: Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? Response: Thank you for your comment. The key findings/impact of PBA education programmes are not included as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022). The broad objective of this scoping review is to investigate and describe the range and characteristics of PBA programmes, identifying commonalities and differences. The review will include studies of all designs, including grey literature and without a specific focus on RCTs, the effectiveness of PBA programmes cannot therefore be specifically evaluated. However, key findings and educational impact have been included in the data extraction fields and may assist with the objectives of recognising gaps in the existing research and determining the potential value of a full systematic review on this topic (Levac et al, 2010). Review comment 13: Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 4. Review comments 14: Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Response: Thank you for your comment. We have corrected the text. Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review Comment 9: Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/ or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 2. As outlined, we have included further details in the Introduction section of the protocol. Review comment 10: Research question - The research question is clearly stated. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 1 1: Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 12: Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? Response: Thank you for your comment. The key findings/impact of PBA education programmes are not included as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022). The broad objective of this scoping review is to investigate and describe the range and characteristics of PBA programmes, identifying commonalities and differences. The review will include studies of all designs, including grey literature and without a specific focus on RCTs, the effectiveness of PBA programmes cannot therefore be specifically evaluated. However, key findings and educational impact have been included in the data extraction fields and may assist with the objectives of recognising gaps in the existing research and determining the potential value of a full systematic review on this topic (Levac et al, 2010). Review comment 13: Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 4. Review comments 14: Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Response: Thank you for your comment. We have corrected the text. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: McAllister LL. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r35621 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v1#referee-response-35621 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 08 Sep 2023 Lindy L. McAllister , Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r35621 A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow ... Continue reading READ ALL A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. There are a few typos eg guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT McAllister LL. Reviewer Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r35621 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v1#referee-response-35621 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 15 Jan 2024 Lucy Alpine , Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland 15 Jan 2024 Author Response Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time ... Continue reading Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Response: Thank you for your comments. The research team debated the decision to include medical education at length prior to commencing the study. In the end, we decided that the differences in the assessment and supervision processes of medical and allied health/nursing students may have different implications for the content of education programmes addressing PBA and thus the scoping review. A decision was therefore taken to limit the scoping review to allied health/nursing professions only, with a view to providing a clear review of the literature of these professions. We agree, we could have provided clearer justification for this in the introduction and have added further details to this section. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Review comment 3: Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 4: Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 5: Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 6 : Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. Response: The authors understood that a free online data collection and organisation tool should be identified in the protocol. The Editorial Team of HRB Open have clarified they have an open data policy and require all supporting data to made available on publication. This will be achieved through depositing our publication in the TCD Tara Institutional Repository. The reference to Abstracker has therefore been removed from the protocol. Review comment 7: There are a few typos e.g., guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Response: Thank you, we have proofread the article and corrected the typos. Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Response: Thank you for your comments. The research team debated the decision to include medical education at length prior to commencing the study. In the end, we decided that the differences in the assessment and supervision processes of medical and allied health/nursing students may have different implications for the content of education programmes addressing PBA and thus the scoping review. A decision was therefore taken to limit the scoping review to allied health/nursing professions only, with a view to providing a clear review of the literature of these professions. We agree, we could have provided clearer justification for this in the introduction and have added further details to this section. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Review comment 3: Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 4: Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 5: Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 6 : Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. Response: The authors understood that a free online data collection and organisation tool should be identified in the protocol. The Editorial Team of HRB Open have clarified they have an open data policy and require all supporting data to made available on publication. This will be achieved through depositing our publication in the TCD Tara Institutional Repository. The reference to Abstracker has therefore been removed from the protocol. Review comment 7: There are a few typos e.g., guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Response: Thank you, we have proofread the article and corrected the typos. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 15 Jan 2024 Lucy Alpine , Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland 15 Jan 2024 Author Response Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time ... Continue reading Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Response: Thank you for your comments. The research team debated the decision to include medical education at length prior to commencing the study. In the end, we decided that the differences in the assessment and supervision processes of medical and allied health/nursing students may have different implications for the content of education programmes addressing PBA and thus the scoping review. A decision was therefore taken to limit the scoping review to allied health/nursing professions only, with a view to providing a clear review of the literature of these professions. We agree, we could have provided clearer justification for this in the introduction and have added further details to this section. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Review comment 3: Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 4: Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 5: Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 6 : Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. Response: The authors understood that a free online data collection and organisation tool should be identified in the protocol. The Editorial Team of HRB Open have clarified they have an open data policy and require all supporting data to made available on publication. This will be achieved through depositing our publication in the TCD Tara Institutional Repository. The reference to Abstracker has therefore been removed from the protocol. Review comment 7: There are a few typos e.g., guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Response: Thank you, we have proofread the article and corrected the typos. Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Response: Thank you for your comments. The research team debated the decision to include medical education at length prior to commencing the study. In the end, we decided that the differences in the assessment and supervision processes of medical and allied health/nursing students may have different implications for the content of education programmes addressing PBA and thus the scoping review. A decision was therefore taken to limit the scoping review to allied health/nursing professions only, with a view to providing a clear review of the literature of these professions. We agree, we could have provided clearer justification for this in the introduction and have added further details to this section. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Review comment 3: Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 4: Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 5: Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 6 : Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. Response: The authors understood that a free online data collection and organisation tool should be identified in the protocol. The Editorial Team of HRB Open have clarified they have an open data policy and require all supporting data to made available on publication. This will be achieved through depositing our publication in the TCD Tara Institutional Repository. The reference to Abstracker has therefore been removed from the protocol. Review comment 7: There are a few typos e.g., guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Response: Thank you, we have proofread the article and corrected the typos. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 3 VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 07 Feb 2023 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 3 Version 3 (revision) 06 May 25 Version 2 (revision) 12 Jan 24 read read Version 1 07 Feb 23 read read Lindy L. McAllister , University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia Yvonne Finn , University of Galway, Galway, Ireland Susanne Friis Søndergaard , Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Søndergaard S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 03 Feb 2025 | for Version 2 Susanne Friis Søndergaard , Viborg Regional Hospital, Aarhus University, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark 0 Views copyright © 2025 Søndergaard S. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Nursing, Education, Hospital design, Advanced nursing practice, Perioperative nursing I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 03 Jun 2025 Lucy Alpine, Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland Response to Reviewers 09/04/25 from Lucy Alpine re ‘Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol’. Response to Reviewer 3: Susanne Friis Sꬾndergaard Review comment 1: Thank you for the opportunity to review your protocol. I find this a very interesting topic and believe it is important to provide an overview of the existing literature. This Scoping Review (ScR) protocol describes a study aiming to investigate and describe education programs delivered to allied health and nursing clinical educators to develop PBA knowledge and skills. The authors tend to follow the Joanna Briggs guidelines for conducting a ScR. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: The aim of the study is clearly stated; however, the rationale for conducting this ScR seems rather unclear. I suggest that the authors revise the background section to make it more transparent. Consider adding subheadings to clarify why the aim and the research questions are stated as they are. It would be appropriate to establish a clearer connection between the background and the research questions. Response: Thank you for the recognition of the clearly stated aims of the study. In response to your suggestions the research team have reviewed the background section thoroughly and added subheadings to assist the structure and flow of this section. Heading 1: Background Heading 2: The Challenges and Complexities of Performance-Based Assessment Heading 3: Application of Performance-Based Assessment in Healthcare Professional Education Heading 4: Education Programmes for Performance-Based Assessment Heading 5: Rationale for a Scoping Review We have merged some of the sections and restructured the sequence of the paragraphs in the background section to assist with clarity. In addition, we have restructured and added supplementary sentences to the rationale section, which summarises the reasons for scoping review and provides a clearer connection to the research question. Review comment 3: I also noticed a lack of information on how you will address non-scientific and grey literature. It might be appropriate to include a section on the extraction of these types of sources. Additionally, please address the issue that the Open Grey database is no longer active and how you plan to handle this. Response: Many thanks for your comments. The research team developed a Grey literature search strategy which provides a more in-depth description of the search strategies and terms used. This strategy is now referenced in the ‘Search Strategy’ section of the protocol and has been deposited in a repository in line with the HRB article guidelines. The GreyLit database was no longer available when the search strategies were carried out. However, the other databases have yielded a significant volume and range of literature, and we are confident they captured relevant research on this topic from the Grey literature. We have removed GreyLit from Table 1 in the protocol. Review comment 4: Furthermore, I suggest providing a clearer statement of the expected contributions of each author to different parts of the study. Response: The authors details are available in Version 1 publication in line with HRB requirements: Authors roles: Alpine L : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing Barrett E : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Broderick J : Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Mockler D : Conceptualization, Resources, Visualization O'Connor A : Conceptualization, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing Review comment 5 : Overall, I congratulate you on a well-done job. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Søndergaard SF. Peer Review Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r44454) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2#referee-response-44454 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2024 McAllister L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 30 Jan 2024 | for Version 2 Lindy L. McAllister , Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2024 McAllister L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The authors have satisfactorily revised the paper to explain why they excluded literature from medicine in their review, and corrected typos. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) McAllister LL. Peer Review Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.15187.r37759) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2#referee-response-37759 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2023 Finn Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 18 Oct 2023 | for Version 1 Yvonne Finn , University of Galway, Galway, Ireland 0 Views copyright © 2023 Finn Y. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Rationale: The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Research question: The research question is clearly stated. Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? This may be challenging to interpret in view of the types of studies listed in the inclusion criteria and the authors’ intention not to do a critical appraisal of included studies. A focus on the impact of interventions is not usually included in scoping reviews for these reasons. At the same time, it is appropriate to report/summarise the key findings as they relate to the scoping review research question. Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Partly Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Not applicable Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 15 Jan 2024 Lucy Alpine, Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland Response to Reviewer 2: Dr Joanne Finn Review comment 8: Rationale - The rationale for this scoping review is presented well. The multifaceted challenges presented to clinical educators in assessing BPA are clearly outlined. The need for educational training in PBA for these clinical assessors is made. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review Comment 9: Can the authors explain how they view the evidence from BPA education in medical education and/ or how, if at all, this related to BPA education in nursing and allied health? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 2. As outlined, we have included further details in the Introduction section of the protocol. Review comment 10: Research question - The research question is clearly stated. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 1 1: Methods: The study design and methods are described well. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 12: Can the authors consider the relevance of reporting key findings/impact of identified PBA education programmes as one of the objectives? Response: Thank you for your comment. The key findings/impact of PBA education programmes are not included as a specific objective in line with the definitions and purposes of a scoping review (Levac et al, 2010, Peters et al, 2022). The broad objective of this scoping review is to investigate and describe the range and characteristics of PBA programmes, identifying commonalities and differences. The review will include studies of all designs, including grey literature and without a specific focus on RCTs, the effectiveness of PBA programmes cannot therefore be specifically evaluated. However, key findings and educational impact have been included in the data extraction fields and may assist with the objectives of recognising gaps in the existing research and determining the potential value of a full systematic review on this topic (Levac et al, 2010). Review comment 13: Please review the purpose of reference to Abstrackr. Do the authors intend to use this? Response: Please see our response to reviewer 1, comment 4. Review comments 14: Please not the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Review checklist is abbreviated to PRISMA-ScR. Response: Thank you for your comment. We have corrected the text. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern Finn Y. Peer Review Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r36233) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v1#referee-response-36233 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2023 McAllister L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 08 Sep 2023 | for Version 1 Lindy L. McAllister , Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia 0 Views copyright © 2023 McAllister L. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. There are a few typos eg guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Is the rationale for, and objectives of, the study clearly described? Yes Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Yes Are sufficient details of the methods provided to allow replication by others? Yes Are the datasets clearly presented in a useable and accessible format? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 15 Jan 2024 Lucy Alpine, Discipline of Physiotherapy, Trinity College Dublin, Trinity Center for Health Sciences, D08W9RT, Ireland Response to Reviewer 1: Prof. Lindy McAllister Review comment 1: A clearly written protocol to add to knowledge on an important topic. Response: Thank you for taking time to review this protocol and for your valuable comments. Review comment 2: It is not clear why the decision was taken to exclude papers from medicine, which as authors says has addressed this topic. This would allow a compare and contrast of findings from an area with little literature - nursing and allied health professions, to an area with more literature – medical education. Or will this compare and contrast be done in Discussion section of subsequent paper which presents the scoping review. Response: Thank you for your comments. The research team debated the decision to include medical education at length prior to commencing the study. In the end, we decided that the differences in the assessment and supervision processes of medical and allied health/nursing students may have different implications for the content of education programmes addressing PBA and thus the scoping review. A decision was therefore taken to limit the scoping review to allied health/nursing professions only, with a view to providing a clear review of the literature of these professions. We agree, we could have provided clearer justification for this in the introduction and have added further details to this section. We have also now clearly articulated our intention to compare our scoping review findings with that of the medical literature in the Data Analysis and Presentations section. Review comment 3: Comprehensive literature introduces the gap in research on education of assessors to use PBA. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 4: Good argument made for a scoping review rather than systematic review. Response: Thank you for your supportive comment. Review comment 5: Search strategy is comprehensive and logical and search terms should pick up all possible papers in the specific nursing and allied health professions. Response: Thank you for your helpful comment. Review comment 6 : Not sure why the sentence on Abstracker is included given it does not appear this software will be used. Response: The authors understood that a free online data collection and organisation tool should be identified in the protocol. The Editorial Team of HRB Open have clarified they have an open data policy and require all supporting data to made available on publication. This will be achieved through depositing our publication in the TCD Tara Institutional Repository. The reference to Abstracker has therefore been removed from the protocol. Review comment 7: There are a few typos e.g., guidance …. Are instead of guidance …. Is; missing plural s on recommendation. Response: Thank you, we have proofread the article and corrected the typos. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern McAllister LL. Peer Review Report For: Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied health and nursing clinical educators: A scoping review protocol [version 2; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations] . HRB Open Res 2024, 6 :11 ( https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14948.r35621) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v1#referee-response-35621 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with HRB Open Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Education programmes on performance-based...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Alpine L et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11", templates : { twitter : "Education programmes on performance-based assessment for allied.... Alpine L et al., published by " + "@HRBOpenRes" + ", https://hrbopenresearch.org/articles/6-11/v2" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/13669/15187") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "15187"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "41216": 0, "40192": 0, "41217": 0, "40193": 0, "40194": 0, "40195": 0, "40196": 0, "40197": 0, "40198": 0, "39181": 0, "41490": 0, "41491": 0, "41492": 0, "41493": 0, "43797": 0, "41494": 0, "43798": 0, "44567": 0, "41495": 0, "43799": 0, "44568": 0, "41496": 0, "43800": 0, "44569": 0, "41497": 0, "43801": 0, "44570": 0, "41498": 0, "43802": 0, "44571": 0, "41499": 0, "43803": 0, "44572": 0, "43804": 0, "44573": 0, "43805": 0, "44574": 0, "43806": 0, "44575": 0, "44576": 0, "44323": 0, "35620": 0, "44324": 0, "35621": 61, "44325": 0, "35622": 0, "44326": 0, "35623": 0, "44327": 0, "35624": 0, "44328": 0, "35625": 0, "39465": 0, "44329": 0, "35626": 0, "39466": 0, "44330": 0, "35627": 0, "39467": 0, "44331": 0, "35628": 0, "39468": 0, "44332": 0, "35629": 0, "39469": 0, "39470": 0, "39471": 0, "39472": 0, "39473": 0, "39474": 0, "39475": 0, "47162": 0, "47163": 0, "47164": 0, "35927": 0, "35928": 0, "35929": 0, "35930": 0, "35931": 0, "42075": 0, "35932": 0, "42076": 0, "35933": 0, "42077": 0, "35934": 0, "35935": 0, "35936": 0, "37758": 0, "37759": 43, "34179": 0, "36227": 0, "34180": 0, "36228": 0, "34181": 0, "36229": 0, "34182": 0, "36230": 0, "34183": 0, "36231": 0, "34184": 0, "36232": 0, "34185": 0, "36233": 74, "34186": 0, "36234": 0, "34187": 0, "36235": 0, "34188": 0, "36236": 0, "44187": 0, "44188": 0, "44189": 0, "44190": 0, "44191": 0, "44448": 0, "44192": 0, "44449": 0, "44193": 0, "44450": 0, "44194": 0, "44451": 0, "44195": 0, "44452": 0, "44196": 0, "44453": 0, "44454": 52, "44455": 0, "44456": 0, "44457": 0, "33450": 0, "33451": 0, "33452": 0, "33453": 0, "38582": 0, "38583": 0, "38584": 0, "38585": 0, "38586": 0, "38587": 0, "38588": 0, "38589": 0, "38590": 0, "38591": 0, "38884": 0, "38885": 0, "38886": 0, "38887": 0, "38888": 0, "38889": 0, "38890": 0, "38891": 0, "38892": 0, "38893": 0, "41208": 0, "41209": 0, "41210": 0, "41211": 0, "41212": 0, "41213": 0, "41214": 0, "40190": 0, "40191": 0, "41215": 0, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "6a8d4c7b-98fe-45ed-a77e-0affe4b0eb94"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); Are you a HRB-funded researcher? Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all HRB grantholders or people working on a HRB-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from HRB Open Research. First Name * You must provide your first name Last Name * You must provide your last name Email * You must provide a valid email address Institution You must provide an institution. Submit Thank you! We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to HRB Open Research HRB Open Research Browse How to Publish About Contact RSS Cookie Notice Privacy Notice Legal Submit Your Research © F1000 Research Limited and its licensors ISSN 2515-4826 | Legal background var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "hrb", displayName: "HRB Open Research", hostName: "hrbopenresearch.org", id: "5", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]" }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); }); (function(){function c(){var b=a.contentDocument||a.contentWindow.document;if(b){var d=b.createElement('script');d.innerHTML="window.__CF$cv$params={r:'a034211edaf5df94',t:'MTc4MDA0MzM0NQ=='};var a=document.createElement('script');a.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js';document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(a);";b.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(d)}}if(document.body){var a=document.createElement('iframe');a.height=1;a.width=1;a.style.position='absolute';a.style.top=0;a.style.left=0;a.style.border='none';a.style.visibility='hidden';document.body.appendChild(a);if('loading'!==document.readyState)c();else if(window.addEventListener)document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded',c);else{var e=document.onreadystatechange||function(){};document.onreadystatechange=function(b){e(b);'loading'!==document.readyState&&(document.onreadystatechange=e,c())}}}})();