ArticleCureus2026
Assessing the Effectiveness of Flipped Classroom Among Undergraduate Medical Students: A Crossover Quasi-experimental Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFlipped classroom (FC) is the pedagogical shift of passive content to the pre-class phase and active learning during the class. During the pre-class session, students develop understanding, i.e., lower-order cognitive skills (LOCS). In class time, they are expected to develop application, analysis, evaluation
methodThis study was conducted in the Community Medicine and Family Medicine (CMFM) department of a medical college in West Bengal, India. A cross-over quasi-experimental design was used with fourth-semester medical students in CMFM practical classes. A total of 125 students were divided into FC and DL groups with crossover after a fortnight during the second session. Pre- and post-tests with 10 validated multiple-choice questions were conducted, and student feedback was collected on a four-point Likert scale.
resultsIn the first session, the mean difference in scores in the interventional and control groups was 1.43 (SD 2.22) and 1.37 (SD 2.14), respectively, with a p-value of 0.53526. In the crossover second session, the mean difference in scores in the interventional and control groups was 0.94 (SD 1.66) and 1.18 (SD 2.01), respectively, with a p-value of 0.9442.
conclusionsStudent participation in FC was low, and there was no conclusive difference in score improvements between FC and DL.
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.