ArticleGMS journal for medical education2023
Effects of the alternative medical curriculum at the Hannover Medical School on length of study and academic success.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dimensions and temporal stability of medical students' motivation: longitudinal evidence from a panel data survey.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Student background, admission routes, and academic success: a structural mediation analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- The impact of changes in medical school admission procedures on study success: A comparative analysis at Hannover Medical School.GMS journal for medical education · 2025Article
- Does voluntary practice improve the outcome of an OSCE in undergraduate medical studies? A Propensity Score Matching approach.PloS one · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The model curriculum HannibaL (Hannoversche integrierter berufsorientierter und adaptiver Lehrplan) differs significantly from other medical study programs in Germany in terms of its structure with which, among other factors, the Hannover Medical School (MHH) saw an opportunity to positively influence the length of study. We investigate how the length of medical study is influenced by the curriculum's structure and whether this has any impact on academic success. Methods: We use data from over 2,500 students who studied medicine at MHH between 2011 and 2021. We measure study time as the number of years which pass until completion of the respective study phases and academic success as the grades achieved on final exams. Results: Since they more often fail or postpone exams, students admitted based on special quotas (VQ) or a waiting list (WQ) need significantly more time to complete the first study phase (M1) compared to students who were admitted based on a selection process (AdH) or who belong to the "best school graduates" quota (AQ) because they earned the highest scores on the final secondary school exam. Yet, students from all admission groups reach the written state exam (M2) almost simultaneously. In HannibaL, WQ and VQ manage to catch up on delays from M1 with no negative impact on success in M2. In general, however, VQ and WQ achieve lower grades and drop out more often than students from AQ and AdH. Discussion: In the regular curriculum, students can only proceed with their studies once M1 has been entirely completed. HannibaL, on the other hand, allows for the catching up of delays from the first two years of study by integrating both study phases. The curricular structure thus accommodates students with lower academic performance who accumulate delays early on in their studies. By contrast, delays in the AQ and AdH groups arise during the second phase of study (M2).
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.