ArticleBMC medical education2026
Bridging physics and clinical practice: a pilot study on plasma medicine education for medical students.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPlasma medicine is an emerging interdisciplinary field, yet educational gaps exist for clinical undergraduates. This pilot study evaluated a 6-week elective course designed to address this need at a medical university.
methodsThe course was developed using Kern's curriculum framework. It blended case studies, project-based learning (PBL), and multidisciplinary workshops to integrate plasma physics with clinical applications. Pre-course knowledge self-assessments were conducted, alongside quantitative course evaluations, objective PBL assessments, and qualitative feedback collection.
resultsA total of 85 students participated in the course. Pre-course self-assessments revealed a substantially deficient understanding of plasma medicine among students, with over 85.8% showing limited understanding of fundamental concepts. Post‑course quantitative evaluations showed over 90.0% of participants endorsed the course's educational value and teaching effectiveness. Regarding the objective PBL assessments, the mean score for PBL project deliverables across all groups was 20.27 out of 27. In qualitative feedback, all interviewees reported having acquired a systematic understanding of both the principles and medical applications of plasma technology. Despite high satisfaction, some students recommended simplifying physics concepts and allowing more time for project-based activities to enhance practical learning.
conclusionsThese results suggest that the interdisciplinary curriculum shows potential for enhancing students' familiarity with and confidence in plasma medicine. Longitudinal validation is warranted to support broader implementation. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.