ArticleMedical science educator2025
A Survey Evaluating Perceptions of Universal Design Practices Among Health Professions Educators.
Article in Medical science educator, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is an educational approach that aims to promote access to information and a method for supporting students, whether they identify as having a disability or not. There is little evidence of UDL approaches being incorporated into health professions programming. Materials and Methods: This survey-based study evaluated health professions faculty and administrators from 30 institutions regarding their perceptions and understanding of UDL principles and availability of UDL resources. Results: At least 88.2% (45/51) of respondents indicated it was important/very important to give students access to information using different modalities, adjustable formats, and assistive technologies. Over half (54.9%; 28/51) indicated faculty are primarily responsible for ensuring access to UDL resources. However, 80.4% (41/51) indicated increased faculty workload is a barrier to maximizing UDL resources. Many (60.8%; 31/51) agreed/strongly agreed that maximizing UDL resources is prioritized by their institutions, but only 39.2% (20/51) agreed/strongly agreed their institution provided sufficient financial/human resources. Conclusions: Our results suggest there is disparity between the interest for and institutional support of UDL resources. This study underscores the need for health professions programming related to education and implementation of UDL principles within existing curricula to proactively support all students in an inclusive manner.
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.