Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40401690›Full record

Trial reportMedical education2025

Should medical teachers spend more time modelling or coaching students? A dual eye-tracking and randomised controlled study on peer instruction in sonography.

Dogus Darici, Hendrik Ohlenburg, Lukas Jürgensen, Cihan Papan, Anita Robitzsch, Markus Missler, Bertrand Schneider

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Dogus DariciInstitute for Anatomy and Neurobiology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2375-8792
Hendrik OhlenburgInstitute of Education and Student Affairs, Studienhospital Münster, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0009-0009-2746-0393
Lukas JürgensenGeneral Orthopaedics and Tumour Orthopaedics, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0009-0000-8470-3552
Cihan PapanInsistute for Hygiene and Public Health, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7951-2567
Anita RobitzschClinic for Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, LVR-University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.ORCID 0009-0005-2941-1123
Markus MisslerInstitute for Anatomy and Neurobiology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8008-984X
Bertrand SchneiderHarvard Graduate School of Education, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0922-2593

Funding

Heinrich-Hertz Stiftung
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhen first introducing medical procedures, instructors must decide how much of their limited time must be allocated between modelling (demonstrate and explain) and coaching (scaffold and support) students. Given the time constraints in clinical routine, it is currently unknown which relative proportion of modelling versus coaching is more efficient for procedural learning.

methodsWe randomly assigned 73 students without prior knowledge to either an extended modelling (EM) or an extended coaching (EC) group for an emergency sonography training. In the EM group, medical teachers demonstrated a routine examination explaining their thought process, while also providing some coaching. In the EC group, students trained more independently with consistent teacher support, with less emphasis on modelling. We used dual mobile eye-tracking and voice recording to objectify the teacher-student interactions and applied a comprehensive assessment to understand which learning domains improved under which condition.

resultsOn post-tests, the EC group outperformed the EM group by 12% in interpreting dynamic sonographic imagery (p = 0.014). They completed the ultrasound examinations 7% faster (p = 0.050). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in interpreting static sonographic imagery (p = 0.322) nor in practical scores (p = 0.062). Contrary to expectations, there were no differences between the groups in terms of eye movement metrics that explained the performance effects. However, two behavioural variables were positively related with learning outcomes across both groups: the percentage of joint visual attention between teacher and student (β = 0.316, p < 0.001) and the number of words spoken during the training (β = 0.175, p = 0.004).

conclusionThis study provides empirical evidence that EC may be particularly effective when introducing new procedural medical skills. In learning complex procedures, direct sensorimotor experience with guided support appears more advantageous than extended observation. These findings suggest that medical educators should give students more opportunities for supervised hands-on practice rather than relying primarily on demonstration-based teaching.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateFaculty, MedicalMentoringPeer GroupAdultClinical CompetenceEducational MeasurementEye-Tracking TechnologyFemaleHumansLearningMaleStudents, MedicalTeachingUltrasonographyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID40401690
PMCPMC12438010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.