Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40959423›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

Profiling learning approaches among Saudi postgraduate medical trainees: advancing education in the Vision 2030 era.

Reem S AlOmar, Nouf A AlShamlan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. 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.

Reem S AlOmarDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Nouf A AlShamlanDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, College of Medicine, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Understanding learning approaches among postgraduate clinical trainees is essential for shaping educational policies that align with Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 and its healthcare transformation agenda. This study examines the predominant learning approaches among Saudi postgraduate trainees and explores their implications for medical education reform and workforce development policies. Methods: A nationwide cross-sectional online survey was administered to 2,010 trainees using the Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST). Bivariate and multinomial regression analyses were conducted to assess associations between learning approaches and trainee characteristics. Results: A total of 1,187 trainees responded (response rate: 59.05%). The most common learning approaches were strategic (39.98%) and deep (37.22%). Female trainees were more likely to adopt the deep approach (adjusted RRR = 1.51, 95% CI: 1.02-2.24), while a history of failing a promotion exam significantly predicted the adoption of a surface learning approach (adjusted RRR = 2.85, 95% CI: 1.44-5.61). Discussion: Learning approaches among postgraduate trainees varied by sex and academic experience, with policy-relevant implications. These findings highlight the need for personalized, competency-based educational frameworks that account for diverse learner profiles. Tailored pedagogical strategies, informed by these patterns, can enhance workforce preparedness, support equitable training opportunities, and inform healthcare education policy reforms aligned with Vision 2030.

Indexed as

health policylearning approachesmedical educationpostgraduate clinical traineesvision 2030

Identifiers

PMID40959423
PMCPMC12433947

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.