ArticleBMC medical education2026
Optimizing cognitive load in digital nursing education: the role of pre-academic performance and material modalities.
Article 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOptimizing cognitive load in nursing digital education requires an evidence-based understanding of cognitive engagement patterns across various learning material modalities. However, the current literature lacks psychophysiological evidence regarding aptitude-by-modality interactions within nursing learning contexts.
methodsA 2 × 3 factorial psychobehavioural experiment was conducted with 58 undergraduate nursing students, stratified by pre-academic performance (high and low) and exposed to three digital material modalities (text, text-graphic composite and video-based). Cognitive load was assessed using subjective measures (National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index, NASA-TLX) and oculometric indices of visual attention. Learning performance were measured through achievement scores and knowledge acquisition efficiency metrics. Data were analysed using two-way analysis of covariance within the general linear model, with Bonferroni corrections applied to adjust for multiple comparisons. Pearson correlation analyses were performed to examine associations between cognitive load and learning performance.
resultsThe analysis included 55 valid cases. Key findings showed that learners with high pre-academic performance exhibited significantly lower subjective cognitive load (P < 0.001 in two of the three knowledge modules) and superior learning performance (P < 0.05 in all three knowledge modules) compared to their low-performance counterparts. Learners with low pre-academic performance experienced cognitive overload, particularly in text-based conditions (P < 0.05 in all three knowledge modules). While video-based materials induced the lowest cognitive load (P < 0.05 in all three knowledge modules), and text-graphic composites achieved optimal learning efficiency despite moderate cognitive load (P < 0.05 in two of the three knowledge modules). No significant interaction effects between pre-academic performance and material modality were observed.
conclusionsThese findings highlight that lower perceived load does not necessarily translate into more effective learning and underscore the importance of aligning instructional modality with learners’ cognitive characteristics. A cognitive-material alignment framework integrating knowledge typology, multimedia design principles, individual learning analytics, and dynamic material adaptation mechanisms should be implemented to prevent cognitive overload in at-risk learners.
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.