ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Enhancing physiology learning through group dynamics: outcomes and perceptions of medical students.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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: In health sciences education, active learning strategies are increasingly recognized for their role in enhancing student engagement and competency development. This study explores the impact of a structured group dynamics activity, framed within a desert survival scenario, on decision-making, teamwork, and academic performance among second-year medical students studying renal physiology. Methods: A mixed-methods design was used involving 195 students, 140 of whom participated in a two-session collaborative activity grounded in physiological knowledge. The intervention emphasized individual and collective decision-making, followed by a teamwork-based quiz to reinforce theoretical content. Academic performance was evaluated using scores from a standardized multiple-choice exam. Student perceptions were gathered through Likert-scale and open-ended surveys. Results: Students who participated in the group activity showed significantly higher percentages of correct answers in the renal physiology exam section compared to non-participants (p < 0.05), suggesting a positive association with improved performance and fewer incorrect or unanswered items. Differences in other content blocks (digestive and endocrine physiology) were smaller and not statistically significant. Survey responses indicated overwhelmingly positive perceptions of the activity, particularly regarding its role in reinforcing knowledge, promoting collaborative skills, and fostering an engaging learning environment. Conclusion: These results suggest that participation in a group dynamic activity during physiology sessions could be associated with better academic results related to the content of this activity. While this exploratory study cannot establish causal relationships based on its design, the activity appears particularly beneficial when the scenario design aligns with course content. These results support the pedagogical value of active and collaborative learning in medical education, encouraging the implementation of similar interventions. However, future research should focus on conducting randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up to establish causality and retention effects.
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.