ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Assessment of individual disciplines before and after a shift to an active-learning and integrated curriculum.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2026. 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.
- Assessment of individual disciplines before and after a shift to an active-learning and integrated curriculum.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Using assessment in pharmacology to drive learning in the right direction.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Reimagining pharmacology education.Pharmacological reviews · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsCurricular revisions that replace classroom lectures with student-led, self-directed learning are difficult for faculty and students due to fear of change and the unknown. The study aimed to compare student performance on standardized assessments across the transition from a traditional, discipline-based curriculum to an active-learning, integrated curriculum.
methodsUsing a database of faculty-generated questions, we used Welch's 2 sample t-tests and the Wilcoxon rank sum test to compare student performance in basic science disciplines before and after a curriculum renewal. Additionally, to investigate student outcomes on standardized assessments before and after the curricular transition, we used independent t-tests to compare results from the Comprehensive Basic Science Exam and simple differences between groups to evaluate performance on the US Medical Licensing Exam Step 1.
resultsOverall results from the question database as well as standardized test performance confirm that students performed the same or better in the new curriculum compared to past performance in the legacy curriculum as well as when compared to peers nationally. In some disciplines, students demonstrated improved performance. Of students who experienced the new curriculum, 8% more performed at or above the national comparison group on pharmacology-related questions than the legacy curriculum students.
conclusionsWe believe our curricular structure as well as our approach to tracking student performance could be a model for other health professions that are considering curricular transformation.
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.