ArticleMedical science educator2025
Study Habits in Medical Education: Examining How German Medical Students Study Using a Cross-sectional Mixed-Methods Survey.
Article in Medical science educator, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The shift to digital teaching and learning during the pandemic has had a lasting impact on how students study medicine. Understanding how medical students learn and which resources they use is essential for successfully implementing teaching innovations. In this cross-sectional survey at a German medical school, 340 students completed the LIST-K questionnaire to assess cognitive, metacognitive, and resource management learning strategies. Additionally, students provided information on their preferences regarding educational media and tools used during their study process. Data were analysed with a specific focus on differences between preclinical and clinical years of medical education. Students primarily used resource management strategies, such as effort and external sources of information, while cognitive strategies such as organisation and critical review were employed less frequently. There was a strong emphasis on using local exam questions and a commercial product providing past exam questions and supplemental content. When examining media and tool use in different phases of medical education, the most significant difference related to a less frequent use of textbooks and other literature in clinical compared to preclinical years. Our results highlight students' focus on assessment-oriented learning, particularly the use of past exam questions, suggesting a performance goal orientation rather than a mastery approach. However, due to its cross-sectional design, the study does not allow causal conclusions to be drawn. The heavy reliance on a commercial product not aligning with the local curriculum is concerning, and future studies should explore underlying reasons and potential interventions to address this unbalance. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-025-02324-9.
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.