ArticleBMC medical education2026
What is the impact of undergraduate curriculum assessment on medical education: a China cohort 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUndergraduate curriculum assessment is a systematic, evidence-based review of all curricular components. Our university assembled a multidisciplinary expert panel to develop medical-specific protocols and benchmarks now implemented across the three affiliated teaching hospitals, launching a university-wide, data-driven improvement cycle. This study will measure the impact of assessment on teaching effectiveness by comparing student achievement.
methodsWe conducted a mixed-design study across the three teaching hospitals of the School of Medicine. Longitudinally, we compared diagnostics grades at Branch Hospital 1 for the 2020, 2022 and 2023 cohorts-before, during and after the 2022 curriculum assessment. In a cross-sectional analysis, we compared Undergraduate Clinical Medicine Proficiency Test scores in internal medicine and obstetrics and gynecology among students who completed both courses in 2022 at the three affiliated teaching hospitals.
resultsFollowing the 2022 curricular review, diagnostics final-examination scores at Branch Hospital 1 appeared to trend upward relative to both pre- and post-review years, whereas total course grades remained stable. Internal medicine was reviewed only at Branch Hospital 1, where students tended to score somewhat higher than their peers at Branch Hospital 3 in theory, and the top 27% seemed to outperform counterparts at Branch Hospital 2. Obstetrics and gynecology, evaluated at Branch Hospitals 1 and 2, showed somewhat higher scores than at Branch Hospital 3. Student surveys generally reflected positively on the reviewed curriculum's teaching quality.
conclusionsCurriculum assessment appears to be associated with short-term gains in examination performance and may support ongoing improvements in theoretical mastery, particularly among high-achieving students. We will therefore continue to refine the undergraduate evaluation system to better serve the medical program.
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.