SynthesisBMC medical education2025
Medical students' evaluation of digital problem-based learning: a mixed-methods systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC medical education, 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.
- Effectiveness of a Radiology Assistant-based blended learning model in medical imaging internship education: a prospective randomized comparative study.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Problem-based learning promotes causal physiological reasoning in first-year medical students before formal cardiovascular instruction.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital Problem-Based Learning (DPBL) is becoming more frequently used to facilitate the development of knowledge and skills in medical education, yet student satisfaction and engagement with DPBL remain insufficiently understood.
methodsThis mixed-methods systematic review aimed to examine how medical students perceive and experience DPBL. We searched four databases (Feb 5-Jun 30, 2024) following JBI and PRISMA guidelines, yielding 3459 abstracts and 56 included studies. Studies published at any time and in any language were considered. Two researchers independently conducted screening, selection, quality assessment and analysis. A segregated approach was used to synthesize the data. This method included a thematic synthesis of the qualitative data and a narrative review/meta-analysis for quantitative data where appropriate. The findings of both syntheses were then integrated and validated by stakeholders.
resultsThe mixed-methods synthesis demonstrated that both quantitative and qualitative findings complemented each other, offering a comprehensive understanding of medical students' perceptions of DPBL. Overall, students had a positive evaluation of DPBL, despite some mixed perceptions. Quantitatively, the satisfaction rate was 78.51% (95% CI: 78.07% - 78.96%) across 20 studies. Qualitatively, students' social perceptions varied, with some feeling isolated and others valued the focused learning environment. DPBL tasks provided ownership, autonomy, and flexibility. Technology was useful, engaging, and motivational, though feedback was occasionally lacking. Visual and auditory features were appreciated, but tactile realism was limited. The study findings were validated by 10 medical students.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that DPBL design still struggles to reconcile technological innovation with the social principles of traditional PBL. A hybrid model may offer a practical way to bridge this gap.
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.