ArticleJournal of general and family medicine2025
Undergraduate general medicine education in Japan: A nationwide cross-sectional survey of medical trainees' perspectives.
Article in Journal of general and family medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Developing a Competency List for General Practitioners/Family Physicians Providing Care for Dual-Location Residents: Expert Consensus via the Delphi Technique.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Club Activity, Study Groups, and Academic Achievement: A Nationwide Study of Japanese Medical Students' Extracurricular Life.Journal of general and family medicine · 2026Article
- Student Engagement from the Medical Trainees' Perspective and Associated Factors: A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study.JMA journal · 2026Article
- Medical students' perceptions of professional mission in an AI-driven healthcare future: a text mining analysis of reflective essays in Japan.Journal of rural medicine : JRM · 2025Article
- Undergraduate general medicine education in Japan: A nationwide cross-sectional survey of medical trainees' perspectives.Journal of general and family medicine · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The 2022 revised version of the Model Core Curriculum (MCC) for Medical Education in Japan includes "generalism" as a new expertise quality and ability, based on the results of surveys of experts in health professions education. However, the perspectives of medical trainees under the pre-2022 MCC revision were under-examined. Here, we investigated what these trainees felt they had learned about general medicine (GM)-related topics. Methods: We performed a nationwide cross-sectional study using an anonymous online questionnaire, which was developed with reference to the 2022 revised MCC. The questionnaire consisted of 14 items. For all items, we asked, "Did you learn enough during medical school?" Respondents were asked to respond on a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Results: Three hundred and eighty-six participants (response rate 55.4%) were included in the analysis. For the item "Behavioral science," the number of participants who chose "3 = neither agree nor disagree" was highest, at 171 (44.3%) and with an average of 3.28, indicating that this item was perceived as insufficiently studied. Approximately half of the participants chose "4 = agree" for all items other than "Behavioral science." Conclusions: The study suggested that behavioral science may be underlearned among medical trainees of the pre-2022 MCC generation. Medical educators in Japan should formulate curricula in accordance with the 2022 revision MCC and improve curricula regarding behavioral science. Future research should survey the generation of trainees who receive 2022 revision MCC-compliant medical education; comparison of results with those of this study would be valuable in examining the effects of the revised guideline and inform international medical educators.
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.