ArticleInternational journal of medical education2026
Traditionalist, supplementer, or reformer? medical student use of non-official curricular resources.
Article in International journal of 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to explore why and how medical students use non-traditional learning resources relative to the formal curriculum, to inform curriculum development efforts, and support self‑directed learning. Methods: A qualitative study grounded in a pragmatic research approach was conducted using semi structured interviews with medical students at the University of Ottawa. Participant recruitment occurred via email/social media, and a pre survey was used to ensure sampling of both low- and high-level resource users. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis in NVivo. Analysis was both deductive, guided by self-regulated learning (motivation, goal setting, feedback, self-monitoring), and inductive to capture unanticipated themes. Results: Twenty-nine students participated (18 pre-clerkship; 11 clerkship). Four themes were developed: two addressing motivations for using non‑traditional resources-the traditional curriculum is repetitive and inflexible and non‑traditional resources are high‑yield and flexible; one addressing goal setting-studying for today's exam or tomorrow's patient; and one addressing how students engage with resources, captured through three archetypes-the Traditionalist, the Supplementer, and the Reformer. Conclusions: This study demonstrates how medical students navigate learning by turning to non-traditional resources, shaped by their motivations, goal orientations, and distinct engagement patterns. These insights highlight opportunities to streamline and modernize curricula, integrate vetted high yield resources, and strengthen students' self-regulated learning skills. Leveraging the three learner archetypes can further guide curriculum planning by recognizing diverse learning approaches, engaging Supplementers as indicators of curricular gaps, supporting Traditionalists with structured pathways, and viewing Reformers' non-attendance as an expression of SRL rather than disengagement.
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.