ArticleBMC medical education2026
Application of Mini-CEX combined with student-standardized patients in rehabilitation medicine residents' standardized training.
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 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A study of the effectiveness of the BOPPPS model combined with FC-CBL in the standardized training of general medicine residents.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
- Development and Pilot Evaluation of the ECALM Program: A Bedside Clinical Assessment Tool for First-Year Residents in the Emergency Department.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Enhancing organizational health literacy through pediatric clinical training: Mini-CEX-based formative assessment in case-based learning for pediatric pneumonia-a perspective.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
Abstract
backgroundThe mini clinical evaluation exercise (Mini-CEX) is widely recognized as an effective measure for standardized training for resident physicians in European and American countries. However, in China, use of the Mini-CEX evaluation is limited to clinical patients. Previous studies have not assessed the combined efficacy of the Mini-CEX with student-standardized patients (SSPs) in rehabilitation medicine education. Therefore, this study explored whether combining Mini-CEX and SSP can improve resident physicians’ clinical and communication skills.
methodsThe sample comprised students who received standardized training for resident physicians from January 2022 to December 2023. Before the training began, the observation and control groups received Mini-CEX evaluation. During the training period, the observation group received Mini-CEX combined with SSP evaluation every 2 weeks, while the control group was not evaluated. Before leaving the department after the eighth week, the resident physicians’ learning outcomes were uniformly evaluated, including theoretical knowledge, Mini-CEX, clinical thinking, and specialized skills. A questionnaire was used to collect students’ evaluations of teaching.
resultsAfter 8 weeks, the Mini-CEX combined with SSP group was superior to the control group in terms of consultation skills, communication skills, clinical judgment, humanistic concern, and overall clinical competency (p < 0.05). Compared with traditional Mini-CEX, resident physicians made greater progress in their clinical comprehensive abilities, especially in clinical thinking, patient reception and case writing (p < 0.05). The survey results indicated that resident physicians were highly satisfied with the Mini-CEX combined with SSP.
conclusionMini-CEX combined with SSP is an effective and reliable evaluation method for rehabilitation resident physician training, with advantages for improving students’ clinical abilities.
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.