ArticleBMC medical education2022
Peer evaluations of group work in different years of medical school and academic achievement: how are they related?
Article in BMC medical education, 2022. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of COACH2COACH and R2C2 (Relationship, Reaction, Content, Coaching) Model in Improving Peer-feedback for students' professional development.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- Development and validation of the medical students' self-reported selfishness questionnaire (MSSSQ): a context-specific design for assessing selfish tendencies in medical education.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- The impact of study habits and personal factors on the academic achievement performances of medical students.BMC medical education · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo develop the skills needed in health care teams, training communication and teamwork skills are important in medical education. Small group collaborative learning is one of the methods utilized in such trainings, and peer evaluation is suggested to be useful in reinforcing the effectiveness of group learning activities. In Mie University Faculty of Medicine, group work consisting of book review sessions of liberal arts education in the first grade and problem-based learning (PBL) sessions in preclinical years were conducted using the same peer evaluation system that included three domains: degree of prior learning, contribution to group discussion, and cooperative attitude. This study was conducted to determine the relationships among behaviors during group work and the academic achievement of medical students.
methodsWith the data from a cohort of medical students in three consecutive academic years (n = 340), peer evaluation scores in groupworks of book review sessions, those in PBL sessions and paper test scores of preclinical years were analyzed. The correlations were analyzed with Spearman's correlation coefficient, and the respective scores were compared by using the Wilcoxon signed-ranked test.
resultsSignificant correlations were observed among the evaluation scores of respective domains in group work and paper test scores. The degree of prior learning had the strongest relationship among the three domains (r
conclusionMedical students maintained their groupwork behaviors to some extent from early school to preclinical years. Those behaviors were positively related to their academic achievement in the later years of the medical education curriculum. Our study highlighted the importance of the early introduction of group work. The results will be useful to motivate medical students to put more effort into group work.
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.