ArticleNeurology. Education2026
Education Research: Case-Based and Near-Peer Teaching on Functional Neurologic Disorder in the Neurology Clerkship: A Cross-Site Comparative Pilot Study.
Article in Neurology. Education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Reframing Patient-Centered Medical Education.Neurology. Education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Undergraduate medical education on functional neurologic disorders (FNDs) is limited and misconceptions regarding the diagnosis of FND are common, negatively affecting medical student knowledge, and attitudes about FND. We developed a multicomponent educational program on FND and delivered it to medical students previously assigned at random to 1 of 2 neurology clerkship sites, evaluating its effects on FND knowledge and attitudes. Methods: This program, run monthly from January to December 2025, consisted of a case-based session delivered by an attending neurologist followed by a near-peer session delivered by a medical student. Primary outcome was FND knowledge, measured via 10 multiple choice questions; between-group difference in mean percentage correct was evaluated using 5,000 bootstrapped samples. Student attitudes on FND, serving as exploratory outcomes, were measured using Likert-style items; between-group differences were evaluated using standardized mean differences (SMDs), with |0.2|, |0.5|, and |0.8| interpreted as small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively. Student feedback was also evaluated to guide future implementation. Results: Primary outcome data were available for 26/52 intervention site and 15/49 control site students. Intervention site students correctly answered more FND knowledge items (mean = 92%, SD = 8%) than students at the control site (mean = 72%, SD = 27%, mean difference = 20%, 95% CI 8.5%-36%). On FND attitude items, intervention site students demonstrated moderate effects in the direction of greater self-reported understanding (SMD = 0.57, 95% CI -0.11 to 1.3) and comfort with FND (SMD = 0.64, 95% CI -0.05 to 1.3). They also reported greater disagreement with the statement that psychiatrists, not neurologists, should care for patients with FND (SMD = -1.1, 95% CI -1.8 to -0.35). In their feedback, students valued learning about FND but questioned the need for 2 sessions. Discussion: Compared with a control group, medical students at a clerkship site that implemented case-based and near-peer didactic sessions demonstrated greater clinical knowledge of FND, as well as signals of more positive and less negative attitudes toward patients with FND. Although limited by sample size and response rates, these findings support the implementation of focused didactics on FND in neurology clerkships.
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.