Trial reportBMC medical education2026
Integrating Case-Based Learning (CBL) and Concept Mapping (CM) enhances learning outcomes in medical biochemistry.
Trial report 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTeaching biochemistry poses significant challenges in undergraduate medical education. Case-based learning (CBL) and concept mapping (CM) are two widely recognized instructional strategies in medical education. This study aimed to integrate CBL with CM in biochemistry teaching and evaluate the combined effects of these strategies on medical students' learning outcomes, compared to traditional didactic lectures.
methodsThis study included 60 second-year medical students from Hunan University of Medicine (China) in their first semester. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: a control group (n = 30) that received traditional didactic lectures, and an innovation group (n = 30) that participated in a CBL- and CM-based program. A final examination and Likert-scale questionnaires were used to evaluate the effectiveness and potential advantages of the innovative approach compared to conventional lectures.
resultsStudents who participated in the innovative program achieved significantly higher final examination scores than those who received traditional didactic lectures. The majority of students enjoyed using CBL combined with CM, with their overall preference for this combined approach scoring 4.93 out of 5. Notably, the highest-rated aspect (4.97/5) was the combination's effectiveness in enhancing logical thinking abilities, while its role in bridging the gap between basic science and clinical practice also received a high score of 4.83/5.
conclusionThe innovative program integrating CBL and CM not only led to higher academic performance compared to the traditional course but also received overwhelmingly positive feedback from students. They particularly valued the combined use of CBL and CM for enhancing their logical thinking skills and bridging the gap between basic science and clinical practice.
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.