ArticleBMC medical education2018
Conceptions of learning factors in postgraduate health sciences master students: a comparative study with non-health science students and between genders.
Article in BMC medical education, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the awareness of novel advanced therapies among family medicine residents in Spain.PloS one · 2019Trial
- East is East: Socratic classroom communication is linked to higher stress in students from confucian heritage cultures.Heliyon · 2023Article
- Identification of histological threshold concepts in health sciences curricula: Students' perception.Anatomical sciences education · 2023Article
- Prospective study on a fast-track training in psychiatry for medical students: the psychiatric hat game.BMC medical education · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe students' conceptions of learning in postgraduate health science master studies are poorly understood. The aim of this study was to compare the factors influencing conceptions of learning in health sciences and non-health sciences students enrolled in postgraduate master programs in order to obtain information that may be useful for students and for future postgraduate programs.
methodsA modified version of the Learning Inventory Conception Questionnaire (COLI) was used to compare students' conception learning factors in 131 students at the beginning of their postgraduate studies in health sciences, experimental sciences, arts and humanities and social sciences.
resultsThe present study demonstrates that a set of factors may influence conception of learning of health sciences postgraduate students, with learning as gaining information, remembering, using, and understanding information, awareness of duty and social commitment being the most relevant. For these students, learning as a personal change, a process not bound by time or place or even as acquisition of professional competences, are less relevant. According to our results, this profile is not affected by gender differences.
conclusionsOur results show that the overall conceptions of learning differ among students of health sciences and non-health sciences (experimental sciences, arts and humanities and social sciences) master postgraduate programs. These finding are potentially useful to foster the learning process of HS students, because if they are metacognitively aware of their own conception or learning, they will be much better equipped to self-regulate their learning behavior in a postgraduate master program in health sciences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.