ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
How first-year medical students perceive changes in their approach to learning science.
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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Students enter medical education with established learning approaches shaped by years of prior schooling. How first-year medical students articulate perceived changes in these approaches during a course emphasizing critical thinking is not well understood. Understanding such perceptions offers insight into how students make sense of new academic demands, irrespective of whether behavioral change is measurable. Methods: This study used a qualitative descriptive design. Nine first-year medical students enrolled in a critical thinking-focused science course participated in semi-structured interviews lasting 30-50 min. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis applied at the semantic level, remaining close to participants' own language and meanings. Results: Analysis generated four themes. First, most participants described a gradual shift from surface-level memorization toward attempts at deeper under standing. Second, the majority of participants reported developing more questioning stances toward course material. Third, several participants described efforts to map conceptual connections across lectures, finding these efforts meaningful but cognitively demanding. Fourth, most participants modified study habits, including increased use of self-testing, after discovering that prior methods were insufficient. Conclusion: These findings suggest that first-year medical students can articulate nuanced awareness of how their learning approaches may be shifting, even when the extent or permanence of such shifts remains uncertain. Perceived changes appear to reflect ongoing sense-making about what effective engagement with medical education requires.
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.