ArticleMedical science educator2024
Impact of Native and Nonnative Study Partners on Medical Students' Confidence and Collaborative Strategies in Second Language Medical Dutch Learning.
Article in Medical science educator, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Twelve tips for teaching medical communication skills in a second language.BMC medical education · 2026Review
- How do medical students make sense of internal and external feedback to enhance their Dutch communication skills?BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Enhancing medical English proficiency: the current status and development potential of peer-assisted learning in medical education.BMC medical education · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study explored how native and nonnative study partners impact medical students' confidence, learning strategies, and perceptions of learning experiences in second language (L2) medical Dutch learning using Kolb's experiential learning framework. Methods: Twelve third-year international bachelor medical students participated in a mixed-methods pre-post quasi-experimental design. Four students were paired with highly proficient native Dutch partners in a mixed group, and eight nonnative students formed pairs in a homogeneous group. The need satisfaction competence scale was used for pre- and post-tests, and individual interviews were analyzed for content and themes. Code co-occurrence and network analyses were carried out to identify the relationships between themes in the two groups. Results: Common themes in both groups included a positive atmosphere, collaboration, and confidence. The mixed group prioritized language learning and motivation, while the homogeneous group emphasized interpersonal relationships and feedback-seeking behaviors. Nonnative students in homogeneous groups gained confidence, while confidence of those in mixed groups decreased, possibly due to comparing themselves with native partners. Homogeneous groups have communication focused collaborative strategies, while the mixed group emphasized personal growth with fewer drawbacks. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that initiating the course with homogeneous nonnative student groups fosters collaboration and builds confidence among participants. However, to maintain motivation and further enhance language proficiency, it is advisable to introduce native Dutch partners at a later stage of the course. This approach allows students to benefit from both the positive collaborative atmosphere and interpersonal growth fostered in homogeneous groups, as well as the language learning and motivation gains associated with mixed-group experiences. Overall, our study highlights the importance of considering the stage of language learning and student needs in designing effective second language learning environments for medical students. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-024-02138-1.
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.