ArticleCureus2024
Study of Efficacy of a Novel Formative Assessment Tool: Keywords Recall.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Longitudinal formative assessment reforms in manual therapy education: impacts on psychological wellbeing and course satisfaction.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Formative assessment is a crucial component of a Competency-Based Medical Education curriculum. Keywords are concise representations of the central ideas and themes explored within a subject. Taking a memory test evaluates knowledge as well as improves future memory. Aim and objectives This study intended to study the efficacy of the "keywords teaching" technique and "keywords recall" after a teaching-learning session as an effective tool for formative assessment and the correlation between the performance of students in summative assessments. Materials and methods Students of first-year professional faculty of medicine students 2022-23 batch attending pre-clinical (physiology) classroom lectures aged between 18-21 years belonging to both genders who consented to voluntary participation in the study were included in the study. Scores of formative sessions by multiple choice questions, keywords recall assessment tool, and summative sessions were analyzed using paired t-tests. Scores of formative assessments and summative assessments were correlated using Pearson correlation analysis. Results Analysis showed formative assessments had a significant (
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.