Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33321913›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2020

Integrating the Gender Perspective into Literature Studies to Enhance Medical University Students' Gender Awareness and Critical Thinking.

Hung-Chang Liao, Ya-Huei Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hung-Chang LiaoDepartment of Health Services Administration, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung 40201, Taiwan.
Ya-Huei WangDepartment of Medical Education, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung 40201, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study attempted to integrate the gender perspective into literature studies to allow medical university students to examine internalized gender prescriptions and investigate whether the integration of the gender perspective into literature studies would create any difference among students in gender awareness and critical thinking.

methodsThis study used fifteen-week quasi-experimental research to verify the feasibility of using the gender perspective in literature studies to arouse medical university students' gender awareness and critical thinking. Before and after the intervention, a gender awareness test and a critical thinking disposition test were carried out by both the experimental group (41 students) and control group (41 students).

resultsThe findings show that regarding gender awareness, with the integration of the gender perspective into literature studies, medical university students had significantly higher post-test scores for "public gender consciousness" and "private gender consciousness." In regard to critical thinking, they also had significantly better post-test scores in "systematicity and analyticity," "maturity and skepticism," and "inquisitiveness and conversance."

conclusionThis study demonstrated that the integration of the gender perspective into literature studies could result in positive learning outcomes among medical university students in terms of gender awareness and critical thinking.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalGender IdentityThinkingHumansLearningPublicationsStudents, MedicalStudents, NursingUniversitiescritical thinkinggender awarenessgender consciousnessgender perspectiveliterature study

Identifiers

PMID33321913
PMCPMC7764421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.