SynthesisBMC medical education2025
Effectiveness of flipped classrooms in Chinese students of clinical medicine major undergoing clinical practice: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness of the flipped classroom in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2026Pooled it
- Application of AI-assisted PBL-CBL combined teaching in the diagnosis and treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia: a randomised controlled trial.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Cost-effectiveness of virtual patient integration in dermatology education: evidence for precision education by learner expertise.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Impact of a hybrid flipped classroom and case-based learning model on learning outcomes and competency development inFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Competency-based, multicomponent teaching reform in medical imaging technology: a quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
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
Abstract
introductionClinical practice is a cornerstone of undergraduate training in Chinese medical education, ensuring the development of essential skills for future professionals. While flipped classrooms have gained popularity for their potential to enhance learning outcomes, the effectiveness of this approach in clinical settings remains underexplored. This study aims to address this research gap by consolidating evidence on the impact of flipped classrooms through a comprehensive meta-analysis.
methodsTwo researchers independently screened all the retrieved articles and did data extraction. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized trials was used for methodological quality assessment. Weighted mean differences (WMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to compare the differences in theoretical and skill scores between the flipped classrooms and traditional lecture groups. The Cochran Q test and the I2 statistic were used for heterogeneity analysis. The funnel plots were used to assess the publication bias. All analyses will be performed via RevMan version 5.3.
resultsA total of 19 studies were included in the final analysis, 18 of which were eligible for quantitative analysis. As a high level of heterogeneity of included studies, random effect models were used. Both the theoretical and skill scores in flipped classroom students were higher than those in traditional lecture students (SMD = 8.33, 95% CI: 5.91-10.75, P < 0.001; SMD = 7.91, 95% CI: 5.86-9.91, P < 0.001, respectively). However, all included studies were of poor quality, and funnel plots indicated the presence of publication bias.
conclusionFlipped classrooms demonstrate potential in improving both theoretical knowledge and practical skills among medical students in clinical practice. Despite these promising results, the interpretation is limited by methodological shortcomings and potential publication bias in the included studies. Future research should focus on conducting high-quality, large-scale trials to validate these findings and explore their broader applicability.
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.