ArticleBMC medical education2025
Application of project-based and simulation-based approaches in medical curriculum.
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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates the implementation of project-based learning (PrBL) and simulation-based learning (SBL) within the undergraduate medical curriculum to support the development of research and academic writing skills. A total of 247 students participated: 179 in the PrBL component and 68 in the SBL component using the Anatomage table. The study aimed to examine whether these pedagogical approaches could enhance academic performance and promote originality in student work. Students engaged in PrBL demonstrated higher average academic performance scores (82.5) compared to those completing traditional literature review-based assignments (66.5). Similarly, the use of the Anatomage table in SBL activities resulted in higher academic scores (33.0) compared to paper-based case preparation (26.6), and was associated with lower similarity percentages, suggesting improved originality. These findings were observed in two separate semester cohorts and reflect cross-sectional group comparisons rather than longitudinal pre-post outcomes. While the results support the educational value of PrBL and SBL, the study's design limits causal attribution. Differences in student cohorts, non-randomised group allocation, and potential novelty effects may have influenced performance outcomes. Nonetheless, the findings underscore the potential of research-oriented PrBL and advanced simulation technologies such as the Anatomage table to enhance learning outcomes when carefully integrated into medical training. Future studies employing randomised designs and longitudinal follow-up are warranted to confirm these effects and guide best practice implementation.
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.