ArticleHealth science reports2026
Explaining Faculty Members' Experiences of Clinical Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Explaining Faculty Members' Experiences of Clinical Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Clinical education is a fundamental component of medical training that faced numerous challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding faculty members' experiences and strategies can inform plans for enhancing educational quality during future health crises. This study aimed to explore faculty members' experiences in delivering clinical education during the pandemic. Methods: This qualitative study used a conventional content analysis approach. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews employing purposive sampling. Interviews continued until data saturation was achieved. In total, 14 participants were interviewed. The credibility of the findings was assessed using the criteria proposed by Guba and Lincoln. Results: The analysis yielded three main themes. The first theme, challenge-based experience, consisted of subcategories including intrapersonal psychological challenges, environmental misinformation, and systemic management deficiencies. The second theme, change-based experience, comprised subcategories such as shifts in protective roles, modifications in clinical education environments, changes in patient collaboration, heightened attention to professionalism, and strengthened role modeling. The third theme, problem-solving-based experience, encompassed subcategories such as an emphasis on feedback, clinical education strategies, educational equity approaches, systemic solutions, exploration of international approaches, and comprehensive assessment strategies. Conclusion: The study delineates a three-phase adaptation trajectory-through confronting challenges, navigating changes, and implementing problem-solving strategies-that enabled faculty to sustain clinical education during the pandemic. These experiences yield critical, actionable recommendations for future crisis preparedness. We recommend that institutions integrate hybrid clinical training models and develop formal faculty development programs focused on digital pedagogy and crisis management. Embedding these evidence-based strategies into medical education policy is crucial for building a resilient and equitable clinical education system capable of withstanding future disruptions.
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.