Trial reportEuropean radiology2021
Teaching brain imaging through a drawing method may improve learning in medical students.
Trial report in European radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the efficacy of sequential cross-sectional scanning and combined teaching methods for prenatal screening of fetal conotruncal anomalies.BMC medical education · 2024Trial
- Illustrator-anatomist-clinician triad based pedagogical model in anatomy education: An auxiliary resource amidst lack of hands-on human dissection.Anatomical sciences education · 2025Review
- Scoping Review: Innovations in Clinical Neurology Education.Neurology. Education · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesBrain imaging is particularly difficult to learn and to teach. This study aimed to evaluate the performance of teaching brain imaging through drawing method in medical faculty students.
methodsWe conducted a prospective, interventional, randomized, single-blind study in third-year voluntary medical students between December 2016 and June 2019. Eighty medical students received a theoretical training on brain imaging interpretation and were subsequently randomized into two groups ("teaching through drawing" and "standard teaching"). An initial evaluation was carried out to assess the students' basic level. Three teaching and training sessions were spread over 2 months in each group. One month after the third teaching session, students were evaluated by an examiner who was blind to the student's group. The same comprehensive evaluation grid has been used for the initial and final students' evaluations to give an objective score out of 20 points. Students' scores were compared between groups using the t test and effect sizes were measured using Cohen's d.
resultsStudents' mean age was 21.1 years old. In total, 61.3% were female. Regarding initial evaluation, scores did not differ significantly between both groups (10.1 ± 2.0 versus 9.9 ± 1.9, p = 0.65), thus confirming the homogeneity of the students' basic level. The scores obtained from the final evaluation were significantly higher for the "teaching through drawing" students than for the "standard teaching" students (14.7 ± 2.7 vs 13.2 ± 2.0, p = 0.009, Cohen's d = 0.62).
conclusionsThis study provides class II evidence that the method of drawing alone can improve brain imaging comprehension and analysis in medical faculty students. KEY POINTS: • The method of drawing can improve brain imaging analysis in medical faculty students. • A large majority of students were satisfied by the method of brain imaging teaching through drawing.
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.