ArticleBMC medical education2026
Impact of a tripartite framework on perioperative clinical reasoning in junior anaesthesiology residents in China: a longitudinal quasi-experimental study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPerioperative clinical reasoning is a pivotal competency in anaesthesiology, yet it remains underdeveloped in many residency curricula, including in China. We implemented a longitudinal elective course based on script and dual-process theories, featuring a "tripartite framework" (integrating patient-, surgery-, and anaesthetic-related factors) to enhance reasoning skills among junior residents.
methodsA quasi-experimental study enrolled 82 first-year residents (2018-2021 cohorts) from a tertiary academic hospital. Participants in the experimental group (n = 45) voluntarily enrolled in a supplementary 56-hour course (organ-system modules, small-group case discussions), while the control group (n = 37) received conventional training. Facilitators (≥ 15 years' clinical experience, AMEE-certified) guided script development, analytical reasoning, and application of a tripartite framework (patient-, surgery-, and anaesthetic factors). A blended assessment strategy-incorporating MCQs, structured oral examinations, and anaesthesia planning tasks-was employed at 3-4 months and approximately 16 months post-intervention to evaluate short-term pedagogical impact and medium-term competency development. Questionnaires were distributed to evaluate course satisfaction and perceived clinical utility. Effect sizes (Cohen's d) were calculated to assess educational impact.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable between groups (p > 0.05). In the short-term assessment (3-4 months), the experimental group outperformed controls only in anaesthesia planning (64.2 ± 5.8 vs. 60.8 ± 8.5, p < 0.05, d = 0.47). Notably, by the 16-month medium-term assessment, the experimental group demonstrated significant and comprehensive superiority in all domains: MCQs (108.9 ± 8.8 vs. 99.8 ± 8.9, d = 1.02), anaesthesia planning (78.7 ± 9.1 vs. 70.5 ± 8.2, d = 0.94), and oral exams (80.5 ± 10.7 vs. 67.7 ± 9.1, d = 0.99) (all p < 0.01). While 47.7% of participants reported a notable learning burden, 95.5% expressed overall satisfaction and 97.7% perceived a positive impact on clinical practice.
conclusionThis course effectively bridges cognitive theory and clinical practice, demonstrating measurable improvements in perioperative reasoning. The tripartite framework provides a replicable cognitive scaffold for high-acuity specialty training. Longitudinal data underscore the importance of sustained practice and blended assessments for competency maturation.
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.