ArticleCureus2025
Interactive Teaching Practices Among Trained and Untrained Medical Educators: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
BACKGROUND AND
aimCompetency-based medical curricula necessitate medical educators to incorporate interactive learning during lecture sessions. However, there is a lack of evidence on the impact of faculty training programs on educators' interactive teaching practices. Hence, this study compared the practices and beliefs of medical educators who had attended short-term and long-term educational training programs with those of educators who had not. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis questionnaire-based cross-sectional study was conducted among Phase 1 (pre-clinical) and Phase 2 (para-clinical) medical educators from multiple institutions. Data on educators' medical education training, perceived use of interactive teaching, preferred methods, difficulty levels of varied teaching strategies, perceived reasons for implementation, and challenges faced when implementing interactive teaching methods in lectures were collected. A total of 229 Phase 1 and Phase 2 medical teachers completed the survey, and their responses were analyzed.
resultsEducators who had participated in short-term and long-term medical education training programs have reported more frequent use of interactive teaching techniques compared to those who had not. Nonetheless, except for a few cases, the two groups were similar in their preferred interactive teaching methods, preferred methods for promoting higher-order thinking, difficulty levels of strategies, and perceived reasons for and barriers to implementation.
conclusionWhile educators who do not attend faculty development programs have similar perceptions of interactive teaching compared to those who attend training programs, engaging in training programs significantly increases the likelihood that an educator will utilize interactive teaching techniques in the classroom. This could be a multifactorial phenomenon or a reflection of the inherent nature of interactive teaching practice.
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.