ArticleBMC medical education2026
Evaluation of the new Egyptian undergraduate medical program from the perspectives of faculty and institutional leadership: a nationwide, mixed-method study.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn response to global calls for medical education reform, Egypt restructured its national undergraduate medical education program from a 6 + 1 model to a competency-based "5 + 2" model. This reformed program emphasizes early clinical exposure, integration of basic and clinical sciences, student-centered learning, and alignment with national academic reference standards. With the graduation of the first cohort in 2023, this study aimed to evaluate the program's effectiveness from the perspectives of faculty and institutional leadership.
methodsA concurrent mixed-methods design was employed. Quantitative data were collected through a validated, researcher-developed online survey distributed to faculty across 27 Egyptian medical colleges. A total of 10,728 responses were received. Exploratory factor analysis confirmed the construct validity of the survey, which comprised 42 items grouped into five domains: Program Goals, Content, Learning Resources, and Student Assessment; Program Impact on Students' Professional and Research Skills; Faculty Involvement and Support; Students' Academic Guidance and Support; and Physical and Learning Facilities. Qualitative data were obtained from nine focus group discussions (FGDs) involving 100 academic leaders. Thematic analysis of the FGDs offered complementary insights into program implementation.
resultsFaculty responses indicated borderline to moderate overall satisfaction (mean score 2.99). Higher scores were reported for accessibility and relevance of learning resources and fairness of student assessment. Satisfaction was lower regarding opportunities for faculty to participate in curriculum design and institutional support for research. No significant gender-based differences were found. Junior faculty reported higher satisfaction than senior faculty (p < 0.001). Thematic analysis revealed the academic leaders' appreciation for integrated teaching, early clinical exposure, and modern pedagogies, but also highlighted challenges such as inadequate infrastructure, faculty resistance to change, and variability in curriculum delivery. Leadership support, student feedback mechanisms, and faculty development were noted as essential enablers for successful implementation.
conclusionsThis evaluation documented faculty and leadership perceptions of strengths in curriculum integration, learning resources, and assessment strategies, while also identifying critical implementation challenges. Ongoing faculty development, equitable institutional support, and sustained stakeholder engagement are essential to ensure the long-term success of the reformed program. Findings may offer insights for policymakers and educators working within similarly centrally coordinated, competency-based curriculum reform initiatives, particularly in contexts with comparable national governance structures.
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.