ArticleBMC research notes2025
Teaching medical terminology: comparing the effectiveness of lecture-based and corpus-assisted methods.
Article in BMC research notes, 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.
- Evaluating a corpus-based intervention in medical English writing: a mixed-methods study.BMC medical education · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis quasi-experimental study aimed to compare the effectiveness of lecture-based teaching with three corpus-assisted methods—concordancing, collocation, and frequency—in promoting retention of medical terminology among English as a foreign language (EFL) medical students at Iran University of Medical Sciences. The study evaluated short- and long-term retention of eight cardiovascular terms using the Vocabulary Levels Test conducted at three intervals over a month.
resultsForty EFL medical students were divided into four groups (n = 10 each) and taught the target medical terms using either lecture-based or corpus-assisted methods. Pre-test Vocabulary Knowledge Scale scores showed no significant baseline differences. Results of post-tests showed frequency analysis showed the highest mean score of immediate retention (7.3 ± 0.5), followed by concordancing, collocation, and lecture-based methods. At two weeks, concordancing led (7.0 ± 0.8), followed by frequency, collocation, and lecture-based methods. At one month, concordancing maintained the lead (6.6 ± 0.8), followed by frequency (6.2 ± 0.9), collocation (5.0 ± 1.0), and lecture-based (2.7 ± 1.2). Corpus-assisted methods outperformed lecture-based teaching across all intervals, with concordancing showing the strongest long-term retention.
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.