ArticleMedical science educator2025
Nerves of Steel: Bolstering Student Confidence in Gross Anatomy Through a Peer-to-Peer Intervention.
Article in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Increasing confidence and performance in gross anatomy is crucial in medical education. This study identified challenging anatomical topics in a gastrointestinal (GAS) course and applied a peer-to-peer intervention to improve student confidence and performance in these areas in the following endocrine/reproductive (END) course. Materials and Methods: Thirty gross anatomical structures from a GAS mock practical were classified into six categories. As part of the mock practical, medical students rated their confidence in each answer using a scale of 1-5. Performance and confidence were compared across the six categories, revealing two areas with significantly lower scores. In the following END course, these areas were targeted through a 1-h peer-to-peer intervention. Results: Forty-two students participated in the GAS mock practical. Significantly lower performance was found in nerves and viscera categories. Students who attended the peer-to-peer intervention during the END course showed marked improvements in both areas on the END mock practical. Average performance for viscera increased from 31 to 68% ( Discussion: These findings align with the expected benefits of peer-to-peer interventions. However, the difficulty students faced with viscera, more so than with vasculature, was unanticipated. This unexpected outcome underscores the nuanced nature of student learning in anatomy and the importance of targeted educational interventions. Future research should explore whether students consistently struggle with nerves and visceral structures across different organ systems.
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.