ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2026
Medical versus science students: Knowledge, perceptions and learning of core pharmacology concepts.
Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 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.
- Medical versus science students: Knowledge, perceptions and learning of core pharmacology concepts.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 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
aimsPharmacology is a core discipline underpinning both medical and biomedical science education, essential for understanding drug action, safety and therapeutic efficacy. This study compared pharmacology knowledge, perceptions and learning experiences between second-year medical and science students to evaluate how effectively each curriculum supports acquisition of internationally defined core pharmacology concepts.
methodsA mixed-methods design was employed, involving pre- and post-module surveys and curriculum mapping against the global pharmacology core concept framework. Quantitative data were analysed using chi-squared tests, while qualitative responses were evaluated thematically. Participants included students enrolled in MD214 Introduction to Pharmacology (medical) and PM208 Fundamental Concepts in Pharmacology (science) at the University of Galway.
resultsMedical students demonstrated stronger baseline and post-module understanding of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles, particularly in applied pharmacokinetics such as drug-drug interactions and variability in drug response. Science students showed significant improvement over time, reflecting effective conceptual learning. Both cohorts reported positive perceptions of module relevance and teaching effectiveness (mean scores 7.7-8.9/10) and moderate to high confidence in mastering core concepts. YouTube and textbooks were the most common supplementary resources. Curriculum mapping showed alignment with 23 of 24 core concepts in the medical module and 20 in the science module.
conclusionsMedical students exhibited greater initial competence and perceived relevance, whereas science students benefited substantially from targeted instruction. Findings highlight the value of concept-based, contextually integrated pharmacology teaching and support continued curriculum development guided by international core concept frameworks.
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.