Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40888875›Full record

ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2026

What role do traditional pharmacology textbooks play in medical students' education and exam preparation?

Delany Manotheepan, Roland Seifert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Delany ManotheepanInstitute of Pharmacology, Hannover Medical School, D-30625, Hannover, Germany.
Roland SeifertInstitute of Pharmacology, Hannover Medical School, D-30625, Hannover, Germany. seifert.roland@mh-hannover.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Textbooks have traditionally been a central component of medical education. However, with the rise of digital learning platforms such as AMBOSS and Via Medici, questions have arisen regarding the current relevance of traditional pharmacology textbooks in the study habits of medical students. This study aims to assess the extent to which textbooks are used for exam preparation, identify the most frequently used titles, and explore the factors influencing a shift toward alternative learning methods. An anonymous nationwide online survey was conducted among medical students in Germany from the fifth semester onward. The frequency of textbook usage was assessed quantitatively, while popular textbook choices and motivations for using digital resources were analyzed qualitatively. The findings indicate that while traditional textbooks are still in use, their importance is decreasing relative to digital learning platforms. Nineteen percent of participants reported using textbooks as a primary learning resource, while around 30% primarily relied on digital platforms. Frequently cited reasons for reduced textbook use included the additional time investment required, limited interactivity, and lack of clinical applicability. Moreover, many students expressed a preference for more concise and comprehensible content, including mnemonics, as well as more effective visual representation through tables and illustrations. The present findings underscore the necessity for pharmacology textbooks to evolve with students' learning preferences. At the same time, there is potential for improvement, particularly in terms of instructional design and the focused delivery of exam-relevant material. This study provides insights for the future development of teaching materials in medical education.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalEducation, Medical, UndergraduatePharmacologyStudents, MedicalTextbooks as TopicAdultEducational MeasurementFemaleGermanyHumansLearningMaleSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAMBOSSDidactic preparationDigital learning platformsDynamic learning formatsExam preparationExam-relevant contentInteractivityLearning behaviorMedical studiesOnline surveyPharmacology textbooksTeaching materialsTextbook developmentVia Medici

Identifiers

PMID40888875
PMCPMC12901173

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.