ArticleCureus2025
Enhancing Medical Education Through Digital Artistry: Impact of Workshops on Medical Illustration Software for Faculty Development.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background Medical illustration enhances comprehension in health sciences, but digital illustration remains underutilized among educators, especially in resource-limited settings. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of hands-on workshops in improving the medical faculty's knowledge and technical skills in digital medical illustration. Methodology Three full-day workshops were conducted across Indian medical colleges with 115 faculty participants. Training focused on the use of Adobe Illustrator software. Participants were evaluated using structured pre- and post-tests (multiple-choice questions and practical items). Feedback was collected using Likert scales and open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analyzed using paired t-tests and effect size (Cohen's d). Qualitative feedback was analyzed using inductive thematic coding with inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.78). Results The mean pre-test score was 4.2 ± 1.3, which increased significantly to 8.5 ± 1.1 post-training (mean difference = 4.3, p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 3.5). Over 90% of participants rated the workshop as "excellent" or "very good." Thematic analysis revealed key outcomes, including improved confidence, the ability to create high-quality visuals, and an increased interest in advanced topics such as 3D modeling. Conclusions The workshop effectively enhanced short-term digital illustration skills and confidence among medical faculty. While long-term outcomes remain unmeasured, such hands-on training holds promise for faculty development in digital pedagogy.
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.