ArticleBMC medical education2025
Research on the construction and application of pathology knowledge graph.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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.
- The relationship between instructional feedback and academic performance: the role of artificial intelligence perception.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Construction and Applications of Knowledge Graphs in Ophthalmology.Ophthalmic research · 2026Review
- A Case-Driven and Knowledge Graph-Supported Approach to Pathology Education: Effects on Knowledge Retention and Clinical Reasoning.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDigital transformation in pathology education faces three bottlenecks: fragmented knowledge transfer, low morphological diagnostic accuracy, and weak clinical reasoning. While knowledge graphs (KGs) offer potential solutions, existing medical KG lack multimodal integration and competency assessment. We designed an integrated Multimodal Knowledge Graph (MKG) with O-PIRTAS pedagogy to bridge these gaps.
methodsFollowing Design Science Research Methodology, we built a pathology-specific MKG featuring: (1) Semantic modeling of disease mechanisms (etiology-pathogenesis-morphology-clinical), (2) Cross-modal alignment of digital slides/animations/clinical cases, (3) Embedded metrics (KII/MDA/CCAE) for competency quantification. A quasi-experiment with 533 medical students (2022 cohort control: n = 275; 2023 MKG-O-PIRTAS: n = 258) evaluated outcomes via exam scores, validated questionnaires, and stratified interviews.
resultsThe MKG-O-PIRTAS group achieved significantly higher adjusted exam scores (76.14 vs. 73.72, p = 0.033) and 86% lower misdiagnosis rate in high performers (p = 0.015). Cognitive load diverged markedly (57.5 vs. 75.5, p = 0.007), with high performers dynamically contextualizing MKG nodes into clinical reasoning, while novices required scaffolded pathways. Over 80% of students endorsed enhanced knowledge integration and process optimization.
conclusionThe MKG-O-PIRTAS artifact transforms scattered pathology knowledge into actionable clinical reasoning scaffolds, proving effective for personalized competency development. Future work will scale adaptive scaffolding and integrate real-time EMR modules, establishing a replicable paradigm for medical education intelligence.
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.