ReviewAdvances in medical education and practice2025
Organ-System-Based Curriculum in Medical Education: A Scoping Review.
Review in Advances in medical education and practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Organ-system-based psychiatry education in undergraduate medicine: learning outcomes and specialty choice.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Organ-System-Based Curriculum (OSC) has emerged as a transformative approach to medical education, gradually replacing traditional subject-based teaching. However, the existing literature on OSC has not been comprehensively evaluated. Methods: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines for scoping reviews, we systematically searched five databases-Medline (PubMed), Embase, ERIC, CINAHL, and Web of Science-for studies published in English between 2010 and 2024. We aimed to answer three key questions regarding OSC implementation strategies, effectiveness in medical education, and challenges in promotion. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, with a third reviewer resolving disagreements. Results: From an initial 1206 records, six studies met the inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis revealed: (1) Interdisciplinary team-based teaching with variable integration of basic sciences and clinical medicine, exemplified by improved student satisfaction and exam performance in integrated modules; (2) Effectiveness of academic interventions, including tutoring and problem-based learning, which enhanced clinical reasoning and examination outcomes; (3) Challenges, such as insufficient curriculum integration, limited student engagement in clinical practice, and difficulties integrating surgical education, highlighting areas needing improvement. Conclusion: This scoping review synthesizes current evidence on OSC, demonstrating its potential to enhance multidimensional competencies in healthcare professionals. Addressing identified design and implementation challenges will be crucial to optimizing OSC's impact and wider adoption.
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.