ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Perception and implementation gaps in active teaching and learning: a mixed-methods study of students and tutors in a medical degree program.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Active Teaching and Learning methods (ATLs) are increasingly incorporated into undergraduate medical curricula. However, discrepancies often exist between educators' intentions and students' experiences. This study explored the perceptions of medical students and tutors regarding active learning within tutorial-based sessions at a Middle Eastern medical school. Methods: A cross-sectional mixed-methods study was conducted at a Middle Eastern medical school. Phase II medical students and tutorial facilitators completed parallel perception surveys assessing engagement, satisfaction, and use of active learning strategies. Quantitative data were analyzed descriptively. Four student focus groups were conducted, and qualitative data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis. Results: Fifty-two students and twenty-nine tutors participated. While most tutors reported frequent use of active learning strategies and high satisfaction with tutorial delivery, students reported limited engagement and low satisfaction, with only 9.6% rating tutorials positively. Qualitative analysis identified three key themes: tutor-dominated sessions with limited interactivity, misalignment between tutorial activities and learning objectives, and structural barriers including large group size and inadequate resources. Tutors acknowledged limited training and preparation time as additional challenges. Conclusion: Substantial perception gaps exist between tutors and students regarding active learning implementation. Although tutors report frequent use of active strategies, students often experience tutorials as passive and minimally interactive. Addressing these gaps requires structured faculty development in facilitation skills, reduction of tutorial group size, clearer alignment between tutorial cases and stated learning objectives, and systematic monitoring of implementation fidelity.
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.