ArticleCureus2026
From Classroom to Screen: Enhancing Medical Faculty Competencies With Video-Editing Proficiency.
Article in Cureus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The growing use of digital technologies in medical education has increased the demand for faculty proficiency in video editing and multimedia content creation. Video-based learning enhances student engagement and understanding. However, many educators lack formal training in video production and editing tools. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a national-level workshop designed to improve video-editing skills among medical faculty members from across India. Methods A hands-on national-level workshop on video editing and digital content creation was conducted for medical educators representing various institutions across India. The training covered essential video-editing techniques, including clip trimming, sound optimization, green screen removal, text addition, transitions, and AI-assisted content creation. Participants undertook pretest and posttest assessments to evaluate their knowledge gain. In addition, structured feedback questionnaires were used to assess participant satisfaction, confidence, and the perceived usefulness of the training. Results A total of 75 faculty members participated in the workshop, of whom 70 (93.3%) completed both the posttest and feedback evaluation. The mean test score increased from 4.8/10 in the pretest to 8.9/10 in the posttest, representing an 85.4% improvement in performance. Marked gains were observed across all assessed skill domains, including identification of video formats, use of editing tools, audio optimization, green screen removal, trimming and merging clips, text and transition effects, and color correction. Statistical analysis using a paired t-test demonstrated a significant improvement in participant performance following the workshop (p < 0.001). Feedback analysis revealed a high level of participant satisfaction, with all respondents (70/70, 100%) reporting improvement in their video-editing skills and 62/70 (88.6%) expressing confidence in applying the acquired techniques in their teaching practice. Furthermore, most participants rated the workshop highly for its relevance, clarity of instruction, and hands-on learning approach. Conclusions The workshop significantly enhanced participants' video-editing knowledge, skills, and confidence. Structured hands-on training programs are effective in enhancing digital competencies among medical educators and facilitating the integration of innovative multimedia resources into medical education.
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.