ArticleBMC medical ethics2024
Enhancing intercultural competence of German medical students through innovative teaching on medical ethics with a focus on Muslim patients - a pilot study.
Article in BMC medical ethics, 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.
- Medical statistics education in the big data era: focusing on critical thinking and ethical competence.Frontiers in public health · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEffective healthcare delivery in today's diverse society necessitates healthcare providers' adeptness in navigating cultural and religious nuances in patient care. However, the integration of cultural competence training into medical education remains inadequate, particularly concerning the care of Muslim patients. In response, we introduce a novel educational intervention aimed at enhancing intercultural proficiency among medical students, emphasizing care for Muslim patients.
methodsThe intervention comprised interactive seminars and simulated patient sessions. With a bespoke and the Cross-Cultural Competence of Healthcare Professionals (CCCHP-27) questionnaire the pre- and post-course intercultural competencies of n = 31 medical students of the Medical Faculty of Jena University were assessed. Additionally, there was a control group consisting of 34 students. Statistical analyses including descriptive statistics, paired samples t-tests, Wilcoxon tests, correlation analysis, Mann-Whitney U-tests, and multiple regression analysis were employed for data analysis.
resultsResults of the bespoke questionnaire reveal significant improvements in intercultural knowledge (median pre 1.0 (0.6 - 1.6), median post 2.2 (2.4-2.8), p < 0.001) and in knowledge regarding Muslim patients (median pre 1.0 (0.5 - 1.5), median post 2.5 (2-3), p < 0.001) following the course. Regarding the CCCHP-27, students demonstrated a significant improvement in their skills, with pre-assessment score of 4.10 (± 0.47) and post-assessment score of 4.38 (± 0.40), p = 0.001. Female participants and those with limited prior experience demonstrated greater gains (p = 0.005 and p = 0.053). Notably, the incorporation of a session with a simulated patient garnered favorable feedback, affirming the efficacy of practical application in consolidating learning outcomes. DISCUSSION: Our study emphasizes the importance of integrating intercultural competencies training into medical education and our findings underscore the efficacy of targeted educational interventions in enhancing intercultural competencies among medical students. For the assessment of intercultural competence, our bespoke questionnaire serves as a valuable addition to the German healthcare system.
conclusionImplementation of similar interventions into medical curricula nationwide is imperative to address the needs of diverse patient populations effectively.
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.