ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Students' Learning Preferences in Studying Sex- and Gender-Sensitive Medicine: An Exploratory Multimethod Study.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The impact of sex and gender on health is increasingly recognized and incorporated into medical curricula. However, while there is general consensus about the content to be taught, limited attention has been paid to teaching formats. Hence, in the present study we used an action-based research approach to investigate students' preferences in learning about sex- and gender-sensitive medicine (SGSM). Methods: We applied a qualitative multimethod action-based approach to identify a suitable teaching format for SGSM based on students' preferences. Our study consisted of 3 phases. In the first phase we asked (bio)medical students about their methodological preferences regarding SGSM education. In the second phase, we interviewed teaching experts to identify teaching formats matching the students' preferences. In the third phase, we designed and executed a 1.5 h SGSM seminar based on the students' preferences and the experts' input and evaluated its reception with a focus group and written feedback. Results: Although students expressed learning preferences in line with state-of-the-art teaching standards, the topic of SGSM added a layer of complexity to their execution. Students expressed distinct learning preferences for the topics of sex and gender. Especially in learning about gender, they requested immersive learning experiences, structural safety in the learning space and a balance between self-directed learning and structural input. The experts suggested experience-based or transformative learning formats. The teaching experiment based on these suggestions resulted in an ambivalent experience for (bio)medical students. It proved to be engaging and instructive, but self-direction challenged the students' expectations about the learning process, which felt uncomfortable to some participants. Conclusion: Our experiment demonstrated that topics touching upon the personal and professional identity of students, such as SGSM, place learners in a potential position of vulnerability. Medical students reported a preference for experiential learning formats yet lack the familiarity with them. For curriculum design, this implies that SGSM should be taught through a combination of experiential methods and structured input, embedded within a safe learning environment that supports both self-reflection and the acquisition of factual knowledge.
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.