ArticleBMC medical education2026
Design and psychometric evaluation of a short questionnaire for assessing student satisfaction with innovative teaching methods in basic medical sciences.
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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBasic medical sciences form the foundation for clinical competence; however, students often face difficulties in retaining theoretical knowledge due to abstract content, large class sizes, limited instructional time, and passive teaching methods. In recent years, innovative and student-centered approaches-such as flipped classrooms, small-group discussions, and teacher role-playing-have been widely adopted to promote engagement and deeper learning. Measuring student satisfaction plays a key role in evaluating the effectiveness of these methods. Existing instruments are often lengthy, context-specific, or lack robust psychometric validation. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate a short, reliable questionnaire to assess student satisfaction with innovative teaching methods in basic medical sciences (SSIM_sQ).
methodsThis methodological study was conducted at Babol University of Medical Sciences (2022-2024) and involved 953 medical science students exposed to active learning methods. The study comprised two phases: item generation and psychometric evaluation. Ten initial items were developed based on the literature and expert review. Psychometric testing included face and content validity, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and reliability assessment. Data analysis was performed using SPSS 27 and AMOS 24.
resultsThe final 6-item SSIM_sQ demonstrated excellent validity and reliability. EFA supported a single-factor structure explaining 76% of variance, and CFA confirmed good model fit (RMSEA = 0.040, CFI = 1.00, TLI = 0.997). The instrument showed high convergent validity (AVE = 0.825, CR = 0.966), strong internal consistency and stability (α = 0.960, Ω = 0/960, Intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.976).
conclusionThe SSIM_sQ is a brief, valid, and reliable instrument for assessing student satisfaction with innovative teaching methods in basic medical sciences. Its strong psychometric properties and practicality support its use in both research and educational quality improvement.
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.