Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41257803›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Approaches to learning in pre-medicine: a multi-university mixed-methods study.

Declan Gaynor, Fiza Rashid-Doubell, Celine J Marmion, Isabel Stabile

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 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

4 authors.

Declan GaynorSchool of Medicine, RCSI Bahrain, P.O. Box 15503, Adliya, Bahrain. dgaynor@rcsi-mub.com.
Fiza Rashid-DoubellSchool of Medicine, RCSI Bahrain, P.O. Box 15503, Adliya, Bahrain.
Celine J MarmionDepartment of Chemistry, RCSI University of Medicine and Health Sciences, 123 St. Stephen's Green, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Isabel StabileFaculty of Dental Surgery, University of Malta, Msida, Malta.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the approaches to learning model, it is proposed that learners' methodologies are acquired and adjusted according to the environment and context. Learners can be classified as adopting deep, surface or strategic approaches to learning. Understanding learners' preferences and the factors associated with these approaches can benefit their learning journey.

methodsWe conducted an exploratory multi-university mixed-methods cross-sectional study of pre-medicine foundation/pathway students at three medical schools (Europe/Middle East). Students completed the short-form ASSIST (Deep, Strategic, Surface); n = 159. We assessed internal consistency, compared ASSIST scale scores across groups using non-parametric tests, examined correlations between ASSIST scales and academic performance, and ran a hierarchical linear regression as a confirmatory test. We purposively sampled students (n = 25) based on learning approach and background, and completed semi-structured interviews. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

resultsStudents most commonly reported Strategic (21%), Deep (21%), or Deep-Strategic (29%) preferences. Between-site differences were detected for Deep (Dublin < Bahrain; small) and Surface (Malta < Dublin and Bahrain; small-to-moderate), with no site effect for Strategic. No differences were observed by gender or academic achievement on entry. English proficiency (B2 > C2) and prior education (CHSD < prior foundation programme) showed differences on the Deep scale. The Strategic scale correlated positively with academic performance (r ≈ 0.23), but this attenuated and lost conventional significance in regression once entry achievement and background were included. Qualitative interviews revealed that students switch approaches based on subject, task, and assessment demands. Organisation, time-management, utilisation of resources, and assessment awareness were strong features in strategic approach learners, while surface learners reflected a passive, memorisation-focused approach under pressure.

conclusionsAcross three international cohorts, Deep and Strategic approaches predominated, with modest between-site differences, and approach-achievement links were limited after accounting for background factors. Qualitative data highlighted context-responsive switching and the role of practical strategic behaviours in managing assessment demands. Rather than aiming to shift students to a single "ideal" approach through curriculum change, programmes may achieve more by teaching self-regulated study skills, refining assessment/feedback to discourage unhelpful surface tactics, and targeting transition supports for students with differing educational and language backgrounds.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateLearningStudents, MedicalAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeFemaleHumansMaleMiddle EastSchools, MedicalYoung AdultAcademic performanceApproaches to learningASSISTMedicine.Mixed-methods

Identifiers

PMID41257803
PMCPMC12628898

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.