ArticleBMC medical education2024
The evolution of medical education in the era of Covid-19 and beyond: a longitudinal study.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Positive impact of a patient-perspective video on engagement and learning in a kidney transplant seminar: a cluster-randomized study.World journal of urology · 2026Trial
- Promoting expertise knowledge sharing in paediatric virology: An update (Review).Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Review
- The business of medicine: a cross-sectional analysis of 4- and 5-Year MD/MBA programs in the United States.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Student perceptions and understanding of urology in the United Kingdom - SPARK.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Teaching Attitude, Ethics and Communication Through the Use of An Online Escape Room for First-Year Medical Students.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Strategies for enhancing the quality of virtual education: perspectives of medical sciences faculty and students - a qualitative study.BMC medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has brought about profound transformations in nearly all aspects of life, leaving its impact on the global community as a whole. Nowhere has this transformation been more pronounced than in the sphere of education, including medical education. Healthcare professionals and educators faced the daunting task of preparing the next generation of practicing physicians amid the ongoing public health crisis.
methodsThe study involved students from three different Chinese medical universities (groups A, B, and C, respectively). The research employed two instruments: a Scale of Satisfaction with Simulation-Based Education and a Scale of Satisfaction with Telemedicine Competency Education. Data were collected at three different time points: 2020-2021 (online/distance learning), 2021-2022 (hybrid learning), and 2022-2023 (traditional face-to-face learning).
resultsIt was revealed that students demonstrated the highest level of satisfaction during the hybrid learning period (Time Point 2), while online/distance learning (Time Point 1) received the lowest ratings. Statistical analysis indicated significant differences in satisfaction levels across the various time points.
conclusionsHybrid learning emerged as the preferred method among students, yielding the highest level of satisfaction. Online/distance learning during the 2020-2021 academic year and traditional face-to-face instruction in 2022-2023 exhibited lower satisfaction levels. The research findings underscore the practical significance of hybrid learning for students in medical educational programs, suggesting its potential for optimizing educational curricula and resources within academic institutions.
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.