FIG 3.

Improvements in peer review quality as a result of the full curriculum (A) (n = 9) and embedded module (B) (n = 10). Students’ deidentified peer reviews were assessed by an independent researcher using four metrics: RQI, the single question in the Review Quality Index (34), where the researcher gives an overall assessment of the review; RQI total, the combined score for all questions in the RQI; PREreview’s assessment tool (35); and MHC, the grading rubric created by students in Course 1 (32). Review events are presented on the x axis in chronological order in the curriculum. Scores on each instrument were normalized to percentages to allow for comparisons between the instruments, since the maximum score varied between each instrument. Data are presented as means ± standard errors of means and were analyzed by two-way repeated measures ANOVA (P < 0.0001 for review event in both the full curriculum and embedded module) and by Tukey’s multiple-comparisons posttests for pairwise comparisons between review events. All statistically significant comparisons are indicated: *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001; ****, P < 0.0001.