Trial reportBMC medical education2026
CBL combined with MDT mode in clinical teaching of liver cancer: a randomized controlled study.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLiver cancer management requires multidisciplinary collaboration, yet traditional clinical teaching often fails to foster integrated clinical reasoning skills among medical students. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of combining case-based learning (CBL) with multidisciplinary team (MDT) mode in clinical teaching of liver cancer.
methodsA total of 112 postgraduate students from Dali University Clinical Medical School who completed clinical internships at The Third People’s Hospital of Yunnan Province between January 2023 and June 2025 were enrolled and randomly assigned to experimental group (n = 56) and control group (n = 56). The control group received traditional lecture-based teaching, while the experimental group received CBL combined with MDT teaching. Teaching effectiveness was evaluated through theoretical examinations, clinical skills assessments using objective structured clinical examination (OSCE), and questionnaire surveys. Independent t-tests and chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis.
resultsThe experimental group demonstrated significantly higher theoretical examination scores (87.15±5.34 vs. 81.23±6.12, t=3.41, P<0.01, Cohen's d=1.03) and clinical skills assessment scores (86.42±5.68 vs. 81.08±5.95, t=2.89, P<0.01, Cohen's d=0.91) compared to the control group. OSCE subdomain analysis revealed superior performance in history taking (17.82±1.56 vs. 16.94±1.78, P=0.017), diagnostic test interpretation (17.65±1.72 vs. 16.51±1.93, P=0.012), treatment planning (17.93±1.48 vs. 16.32±1.85, P=0.002), and doctor-patient communication (17.58±1.63 vs. 16.21±1.89, P=0.008). Questionnaire surveys indicated significantly higher satisfaction rates in the experimental group regarding learning interest stimulation (94.6% vs. 78.6%, P=0.011), clinical thinking cultivation (96.4% vs. 76.8%, P=0.002), team collaboration enhancement (92.9% vs. 71.4%, P=0.003), and communication skills improvement (94.6% vs. 69.6%, P<0.001).
conclusionsCBL combined with MDT mode significantly improves theoretical knowledge acquisition, clinical skills performance, and comprehensive competencies in liver cancer clinical teaching. This integrated approach represents an effective pedagogical strategy worthy of broader implementation in oncology education.
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.