Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40553305›Full record

SynthesisAdvances in health sciences education : theory and practice2026

Efficacy of mind maps and concept maps in enhancing academic performance among undergraduate medical students in the preclinical stage: a systematic review.

Husam Aljamal, Rama Alawneh, Afnan Derbas, Mohammad Edaibes, Aya Ahmed, Lama Amer, Hiba Alzoubi, Hashem Abu Serhan

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Husam AljamalFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Rama AlawnehFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Afnan DerbasFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Mohammad EdaibesFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Aya AhmedFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Lama AmerFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Hiba AlzoubiFaculty of Medicine, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Hashem Abu SerhanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar. Habuserhan@hamad.qa.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis systematic review aims to evaluate the impact of mind maps and Concept Maps on academic performance among undergraduate medical students in the preclinical stage.

methodsOur protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024529458). We followed PRISMA guidelines in conducting our systematic review. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library from inception to June 2024. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that involved undergraduate medical students in the preclinical stage, evaluated mind mapping and Concept Maps as the intervention, and compared it to traditional methods or no intervention, with academic performance as the primary outcome. A qualitative synthesis of the results was conducted, and where possible, effect sizes (e.g., Cohen's d) were calculated to quantify the impact of mind maps and concept maps on academic performance. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.

resultsA total of six RCTs were included. Four studies reported significantly higher assessment scores with the use of mind maps or concept maps. Teli et al. (Indian Journal of Clinical Anatomy and Physiology 7(2):243-246, 2020) observed a significant improvement in knowledge retention in the intervention group (mean score: 82.4% vs. 69.8%, p < 0.0001). Concept maps demonstrated moderate-to-large effect sizes, with Ho et al. (Medical Education 48(7):687-697, 2014) reporting Cohen's d = 0.7-0.8 for improved test scores. Two studies found no significant differences in performance (p > 0.05), but students consistently expressed a preference for these methods due to their utility in understanding and summarizing information. Overall, mind maps and concept maps prove to be effective tools for enhancing academic performance, especially in terms of knowledge retention and comprehension.

conclusionThis systematic review shows that mind maps and Concept Maps are effective methods in helping undergraduate preclinical medical students achieve better performance, especially in terms of knowledge retention and comprehension. While not all studies showed significant differences, the overall preference for these methods indicates their potential as valuable learning tools. We recommend integrating these tools into preclinical curricula and providing training sessions to enhance their effectiveness.

Indexed as

Academic PerformanceEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalEducational MeasurementHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAcademic performanceConcept mapsMedical studentsMind mapsPre-clinical education

Identifiers

PMID40553305
PMCPMC13046634

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.