ArticleBMC medical education2026
Enhancing musculoskeletal examination skills through near-peer teaching: student outcomes and perspectives.
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 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.
- Exploring Medical Students' Perceptions of Near-peer Teaching in Musculoskeletal OSCE Preparation.Medical science educator · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMusculoskeletal (MSK) conditions are highly prevalent and represent a major burden in Australia and worldwide, yet undergraduate musculoskeletal education remains underrepresented in medical curricula. Near-peer teaching (NPT) has emerged as an effective adjunct to standard teaching, particularly in developing clinical examination skills.
objectiveTo examine the effect of a near-peer-led, OSCE-style tutorial on medical student performance of the upper limb musculoskeletal examination, and to explore students’ perceptions of its clarity, relevance, and educational value.
methodsA quasi-experimental pre–post study was conducted with 23 second year-year medical students in a problem-based learning program. Participants completed a pre-test OSCE, attended a near-peer-led tutorial, and undertook a post-test OSCE three days later. Assessments were scored using a 15-item rubric with percentage conversion. A post-hoc survey comprising Likert-scale and open-ended questions explored student perceptions. Quantitative data were analysed using paired statistical tests, while qualitative responses underwent content analysis.
resultsImprovements were observed in 14 of 15 OSCE items, with statistically significant gains in shoulder and elbow palpation, shoulder active and passive range of motion, patient comfort, and examination organisation (p < 0.05). The overall average performance improved from 63.8 ± 15.8% pre-test to 76.3 ± 10.5% post-test (p = 0.01). Survey responses (n = 17) indicated that all students perceived the tutorial as superior to lectures, textbooks, or videos, with 59% rating it extremely useful for clinical practice. Thematic analysis revealed strengths in logical organisation, integration of anatomy and pathology, demonstration, and opportunities for hands-on practice. Most students reported substantial gains in confidence and understanding. Findings support the utility of NPT in musculoskeletal education, with improvements potentially explained by cognitive and social congruence, experiential learning, and self-efficacy. While a single session significantly enhanced competence and confidence in many components of the physical examination, skills such as special testing requires repeated practice and longer-term follow up to observe similar gains.
conclusionA single near-peer-led, OSCE-style tutorial supports improvement in medical students’ objective performance and self-reported confidence in conducting the upper limb musculoskeletal examination. It is a beneficial adjunct to traditional musculoskeletal curricula for both learners and tutors. Broader, longitudinal research is needed to evaluate long-term knowledge retention and generalisability.
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.