Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35019800›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine2022

Differences between high- and low-achieving pre-clinical medical students: a qualitative instrumental case study from a theory of action perspective.

Chan Choong Foong, Nur Liyana Bashir Ghouse, An Jie Lye, Vinod Pallath, Wei-Han Hong, Jamuna Vadivelu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Chan Choong FoongMedical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-4790-005X
Nur Liyana Bashir GhouseMedical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
An Jie LyeMedical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Vinod PallathMedical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Wei-Han HongMedical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Jamuna VadiveluMedical Education and Research Development Unit (MERDU), Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor academic performance and failure can cause undesired effects for students, schools, and society. Understanding why some students fail while their peers succeed is important to enhance student performance. Therefore, this study explores the differences in the learning process between high- and low-achieving pre-clinical medical students from a theory of action perspective.

methodsThis study employed a qualitative instrumental case study design intended to compare two groups of students-high-achieving students (

resultsData analysis revealed four themes-motivation and expectation, study methods, self-management, and flexibility of mindset. First, high-achieving students were more motivated and had higher academic expectations than low-achieving students. Second, high-achieving students adopted study planning and deep learning approaches, whereas low-achieving students adopted superficial learning approaches. Third, in contrast to low-achieving students, high-achieving students exhibited better time management and studied consistently. Finally, high-achieving students proactively sought external support and made changes to overcome challenges. In contrast, low-achieving students were less resilient and tended to avoid challenges.

conclusionBased on the theory of action, high-achieving students utilize positive governing variables, whereas low-achieving students are driven by negative governing variables. Hence, governing variable-based remediation is needed to help low-achieving students interrogate the motives behind their actions and realign positive governing variables, actions, and intended outcomes.Key MessagesThis study found four themes describing the differences between high- and low-achieving pre-clinical medical students: motivation and expectation, study methods, self-management, and flexibility of mindset.Based on the theory of action approach, high-achieving pre-clinical medical students are fundamentally different from their low-achieving peers in terms of their governing variables, with the positive governing variables likely to have guided them to act in a manner beneficial to and facilitating desirable academic performance.Governing variable-based remediation may help students interrogate the motives of their actions.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalHumansMotivationQualitative Researchacademic achievementhigh-achievinglow-achievingQualitative instrumental case studytheory of action

Identifiers

PMID35019800
PMCPMC8757602

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.