ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Student Engagement in Program Evaluation: Redesigning the Premedical Curriculum Through Instructor-Learner Co-Creation.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Engaging students in curriculum development provides valuable insights and promotes alignment with their learning needs. Premedical curricula often overemphasize basic sciences, highlighting the need to incorporate social sciences and earlier patient exposure. This study involved students as key stakeholders in redesigning and evaluating the curriculum's clinical relevance. Methods: A two-phase mixed-methods study was conducted, guided by the context, input, process, product (CIPP) evaluation model. Phase one (context and input) utilized a 5-point Likert-scale questionnaire to assess perceptions of 380 students on premedical learning and its relevance to the preclinical curriculum, alongside open-ended suggestions. Student group activities identified key curriculum issues, informing revisions made in collaboration with the curriculum committee and student representatives, aligned with national medical competency standards. In phase two (process and product), 90 third-year students evaluated the revised curriculum using the same questionnaire with student representatives leading the process. Statistical analyses (Cramér's V, Chi-square, and Results: In the previous curriculum, only 38.48% of students agreed/strongly agreed that premedical subjects aligned with preclinical learning, citing limited clinical relevance and disconnected content (n = 21). A student-led review, in collaboration with the curriculum committee, reduced pure science subjects and integrated them into more clinically relevant content, including early patient exposure in community settings, while maintaining alignment with national medical competency standards. The revised subjects were well received by students. Following these changes, 64.45% of students agreed/strongly agreed that it aligned with preclinical learning, and overall perception scores significantly increased from 18.03 ± 0.16 to 19.08 ± 0.35 ( Conclusion: A student-driven approach, supported by the CIPP model, helped redesign the premedical curriculum. It integrated relevant basic sciences with early community and clinical exposure to enhance alignment, engagement, and preparedness for clinical training.
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.