ArticleBMC medical education2026
Beyond learning preferences: exploring the relationship between learning styles and sensory processing among university 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. 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.
- Ageism, ableism, and their associated factors among international undergraduate medical students in China: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudents learn in different ways, and their unique learning styles and sensory experiences can shape how they engage with their education. This study explores the connection between two important factors: learning style preferences and sensory processing patterns. We also looked at how these traits vary by gender, academic year, and field of study.
methodsWe surveyed 462 university students from medical, scientific, and humanities faculties, including both junior and senior students. Each participant completed two standardized tools: the Index of Learning Styles (ILS) and the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (AASP). We then analyzed the data to explore patterns and relationships using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests.
resultsThe majority of students (58.9%) preferred a visual learning style, and most showed balanced sensory processing across the measured domains. Significant gender differences were found in the sequential–global dimension, with female students more likely to be sequential learners (22.7% vs. 12.2% in males; p = .0009). Senior students showed a stronger preference for visual learning than juniors (63.4% vs. 52.2%; p = .03). Additionally, visual learning was more common among students in medical (63.1%) and scientific (62.1%) disciplines compared to those in humanities (50.3%) (p = .005). Although there was no strong overall link between sensory processing and learning styles, a subtle trend emerged: students with atypical sensory profiles (particularly those high in sensory avoidance) showed a slight preference for active over reflective learning (p = .04).
conclusionsThese findings suggest that while learning styles and sensory processing function independently, both contribute to how students engage with educational content. Recognizing these differences can help educators design more responsive and inclusive teaching strategies. By incorporating diverse instructional methods, instructors can better support students’ cognitive preferences and sensory needs, ultimately enhancing learning outcomes for a broader range of learners.
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.