ArticleCureus2024
Examining the Effectiveness of Educational Tools and Elements Used in Medical Textbooks: Students' Perspective.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background As textbooks constitute a foundational component of medical education, it is imperative to conduct a rigorous evaluation of their efficacy by examining the fundamental elements and tools utilized within these textbooks and how multiple factors may alter the effectiveness of such components. Materials and methods We conducted a cross-sectional, survey-based study where 251 subjects anonymously rated the effectiveness of different tools and elements/factors used in medical textbooks using 5-point Likert scales. The population surveyed included year 1 to 5 medical students at Alfaisal University, where students are admitted to medical school directly after high school, with an approximately equal male-to-female admission rate. Students were asked to rate the effectiveness of the following tools: chapter summary, end-of-chapter questions, tables of contents, graphic elements, diagrams, tables, flowcharts, mind maps, sidebars, and links to online resources. In admission, they were asked to rate textbooks regarding the following elements/factors: text clarity, directness to the concept intended, flow of ideas, language complexity, and clinical (vertical) and multidisciplinary (horizontal) integration. The Chi-square, post-hoc, Spearman's correlation, and Kruskall-Wallis tests were used in the statistical analysis to determine the differences and correlations in the students' self-ratings of different variables. Results The students rated tools such as diagrams and graphic elements as the most effective. Graphic elements were rated as significantly more effective by first- and fourth-year students. This corresponds to being exposed to new environments (the first exposure to the study of medicine and the first exposure to clinical clerkship), indicating their effectiveness in introducing new concepts and setting of change. Furthermore, end-of-chapter summaries and questions were rated significantly as being more effective by females (P<0.05). The aim behind using textbooks and the frequency might be governed by how students rate textbooks regarding multiple elements or factors, including directness to the concept intended, flow of ideas, and language complexity. Interestingly, all the above findings were consistent throughout all grade point average groups. Discussion In the rising age of e-learning, our study shows that the tools employed by textbooks remain effective. Our findings are partially consistent with existing literature, which underscores correlations between demographic variables and learning styles. We show that the effectiveness of various tools employed in textbooks can vary depending on the educational setting. While demographic factors generally did not impact students' perceptions of tool effectiveness, gender-specific differences were observed in the perceived effectiveness of end-of-chapter summaries and questions, with female students rating them as more effective, which aligns with existing literature. Conclusions Our study shows that students still perceive the tools employed by textbooks as effective. The perceived effectiveness of various tools utilized within textbooks may be influenced by certain demographic factors and settings, with graphics often proving the most efficacious. This study provides valuable insights for authors of medical textbooks, helping them optimize the usage of various tools by considering the specific characteristics and requirements of the intended audience.
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.