ArticleBMC medical education2024
Medical students as teachers: impact of peer-led teaching sessions on NBME exam performance.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Establishing communities of practice in undergraduate science classrooms.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
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
INTRODUCTION/
backgroundPeer-led teaching sessions (PLTS) supplement conventional medical education, allowing students to share knowledge effectively. PLTS have shown significant academic benefits for student instructors. However, the impact on attendees, especially concerning NBME-style examinations, remains underexplored.
methodsThis study analyzed de-identified data from 67 first-year medical students at Kirk Kerkorian School of Medicine, divided into PLTS attendees (study group) and non-attendees (control group) based on session participation. Data were collected before two NBME examinations, with attendees defined as those attending at least five Peer-led teaching sessions. Academic performance was measured using NBME Customized Assessment Services (CAS) exam scores. Statistical analyses, including p-tests, chi-square, and t-tests, assessed differences in performance and potential biases based on MCAT scores, first-generation status, and socioeconomic background.
resultsThe study group initially had 26 students, and the control group had 31 students. Post-first examination, the study group adjusted to 22 students, and the control group to 35 students. MCAT scores and demographics showed no significant differences between groups. The first examination revealed a significant higher score in PLTS attendees' scores (4.28% increase, p = 0.036), indicating a positive impact of PLTS on basic science knowledge. The second examination on organ systems physiology showed no significant difference (p = 0.722). DISCUSSION: PLTS effectively enhance foundational science understanding but may be less impactful for advanced topics. The diminishing effect may result from increased use of diverse study resources and adaptation to medical school. Future research should explore long-term benefits, optimal implementation strategies, and the impact of instructor quality and engagement. Therefore, the overall conclusion is that PLTS positively influence NBME-style exam performance in early medical education, but benefits decrease over time.
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.