ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2026
Application of Group Concept Mapping in Medical and Public Health Education.
Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Group concept mapping (GCM) is a mixed-method participatory research approach that integrates stakeholder input to visually represent complex ideas and issues. Within medical and public health education, GCM has gained traction for its ability to synthesize diverse perspectives and guide decision-making in curriculum development, assessment, and support strategies. Methods: This article details the GCM methodology and synthesizes the literature on its applied use in medical and public health education. Included studies employed GCM's multistep process-idea generation, sorting and rating, data analysis, and stakeholder interpretation-to identify thematic structures and inform educational practices. Studies involved varied participant groups, including students, faculty, health care providers, and community stakeholders, using both online and in-person modalities. Results: Across studies, GCM was used to address curriculum alignment, competency. development, student well-being, mentorship, diversity, and assessment. For instance, GCM revealed educational blind spots, guided development of interdisciplinary competencies, and prioritized public health outcomes. It also identified resilience factors and mentorship qualities critical for student and faculty development. In assessment contexts, GCM structured feedback mechanisms and clarified selection criteria for residency programs. The method consistently provided structured, stakeholder-informed visual maps to inform actionable changes. Conclusions: GCM has proven to be a versatile and effective tool in medical and public health education. Its participatory nature enhances relevance, content validity, and stakeholder engagement, while its structured outputs support curricular reforms, competency development, and equity-driven initiatives. As the educational landscape evolves, GCM offers a valuable methodology for navigating complexity and fostering inclusive, evidence-informed strategies.
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.