ArticlePloS one2020
Presentation and evaluation of the teaching concept "ENHANCE" for basic sciences in medical education.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital technology for orthognathic surgery training promotion: a randomized comparative study.PeerJ · 2022Trial
- Teaching Methods that Promote Medical Student Attendance: A Scoping Review.Medical science educator · 2026Review
- Understanding Barriers to Nanotechnology Education in Medical Specialty Programs: A Qualitative Nominal Group Study Among Postgraduate Students.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- ICMC: An Interpretable Cross-domain Multi-modal Classification model for grading teaching plan.PloS one · 2025Article
- [Integration of natural sciences and basic medical subjects in the integrated dentistry program (iMED DENT) at the University of Hamburg].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A solid understanding of basic sciences is a prerequisite for successful completion of medical education. Therefore, it is essential to improve the quality of teaching and to ensure the applicability of basic sciences. Based on practical experiences and previous research, we developed an innovative step-by-step concept, called ENHANCE, for the implementation or revision of teaching units, especially for basic sciences. We used comparative self-assessment gains, a questionnaire to assess teaching quality as well as end-of-semester evaluations (students' satisfaction and open-ended questions) to evaluate the ENHANCE concept. It was found that ENHANCE-based teaching units were related to increased students' satisfaction, high attendance rates and that restructuring the course curriculum yielded in a positive assessment of teaching effectiveness. The revised courses were rated as the very best of all classes in several semesters. Qualitative data showed that students particularly appreciated the level of comprehension and how helpful the courses were for the understanding and preparation of the regular curriculum.
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.