Trial reportBMC medical education2024
Impact of learning environment on reading anxiety: a study of medical students in online and traditional settings.
Trial report 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.
- Assessing moral competence in medical and psychology students: effects on anxiety and test duration in online versus paper-based testing.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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reading anxiety is a common issue experienced by students in different learning settings. This study compares reading anxiety among medical students in online and face-to-face learning environments. A group of 70 first-year medical students of different genders participated in General English courses during the 2021-2022 academic year at North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences. The students, with an average age of 22, were selected based on their performance on the Oxford Placement Test. They were then randomly assigned to either the control group (receiving face-to-face instruction) or the experimental group (receiving online instruction). Before the sessions, both groups took the EFL Reading Anxiety Inventory (EFLRAI) as a pre-test. The experimental group used the Sama Live App platform for online instruction, while the control group had traditional face-to-face instruction. Following six sessions, students from both groups completed the EFLRAI as a post-test. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS software, revealing that the face-to-face group had higher mean reading anxiety levels compared to the online group. The results indicate that participants generally see technology as a beneficial tool for enhancing collaboration with their peers.
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.