SynthesisBMC medical education2026
The efficacy of bilingual immunology teaching on undergraduates in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEntering the 21st century, the Chinese government has vigorously promoted bilingual education in higher education (HE) to better integrate with the global world and enhance international competitiveness. The overall effect of bilingual immunology teaching in China has not been assessed. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aim to review and evaluate the efficacy of bilingual immunology teaching in universities/colleges in China.
methodsA systematic search of the Chinese Science Citation Database of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang database, VIP database, SinoMed, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and two key academic search engines was conducted to collect studies published from 2001 to July 18, 2025. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement was followed to guide the reporting of the study selection process. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the MINORS for non-randomized studies. Meta-analyses were conducted using Cochrane’s Review Manager 5.3 software and Stata17.0 software based on random effects models.
resultsA total of nine studies with 939 students were included in this study. Results showed that implementation of bilingual teaching significantly enhanced the percentage of students with a course score above 80 [RD = 0.59, 95% CI (0.39,0.80), p < 0.001], the professional English proficiency [RD = 0.59, 95% CI (0.29,0.90), p < 0.001], and the ability of English application [RD = 0.36, 95%CI (0.13, 0.59), p = 0.003]. Due to the number and quality of included studies, the findings need to be confirmed by more high-quality studies in the future.
conclusionBilingual immunology instruction constitutes a highly effective pedagogical strategy that enhances students’ academic performance, professional English proficiency, and capacity to apply discipline-specific terminology. This approach fosters the expansion of students’ international perspectives and promotes greater adaptability in global academic and professional contexts.
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.