ArticleBMC medical education2026
Scientific education in German medical schools: nationwide cross-sectional study reveals student needs and gaps.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMedical graduates must integrate new scientific findings into clinical practice requiring strong scientific training. In Germany, scientific education in medical curricula is often undervalued, necessitating curricular changes. This study evaluates medical students' current scientific training, perceived and objective knowledge, and their preferences for curricular organisation.
methodsA nationwide cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey distributed to medical students across 45 German medical schools. The survey, conducted from March to May 2023, covered scientific education aspects including self-assessment of scientific skills and an optional 25-item knowledge competency test. Data were collected from 3005 students, with 1319 completing the full competency test.
resultsOnly 53.8% of students were aware of their scientific curriculum, and over 60% reported no evaluation of their scientific skills at their universities. In their final year, 52.7% felt competent in literature search, and 44.1% in scientific writing. However, only 19.9% felt competent in study design, 25.7% in developing research projects, and 19.8% in applying findings to patient care. The average competency test score for final-year students was 16 out of 25, with notable deficiencies in empirics and practical applications. At least 62.2% of students expressed a desire for more scientific training, and 71.3% favoured mandatory scientific courses.
conclusionGerman medical students are dissatisfied with their current scientific education with 75% expressing dissatisfaction. They feel unprepared to apply scientific knowledge in clinical settings. The study highlights the need for urgent curricular reforms to enhance practical scientific training and better prepare future physicians for modern medical practice and research.
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.