Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42701579›Full record

ArticleBioinformation2026

Effectiveness of blended learning versus conventional didactic teaching in pathology education outcomes.

Puja Singh, Jyoti Namdev, Jyoti Shukla

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioinformation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Puja SinghDepartment of Pathology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Jyoti NamdevDepartment of Pathology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Jyoti ShuklaDepartment of Pathology, Bundelkhand Medical College, Sagar, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional didactic lectures in pathology often promote passive learning, limiting students' ability to apply knowledge clinically. Therefore, it is of interest to compare the learner outcomes between blended learning and traditional didactic lectures among 110 second-year MBBS students. The blended learning group demonstrated significantly superior performance in application-based scores (mean difference 4.5, p<0.001, d=1.85), total examination scores (difference 5.5, p<0.001, d=1.48) and all learner engagement domains (p<0.001) with large effect sizes. Student satisfaction was also markedly higher with blended learning (4.32±0.51 versus 3.48±0.62, p<0.001). Thus, data shows the blended learning enhances higher-order cognitive skills, engagement and satisfaction into competency-based medical curricula for pathology education.

Indexed as

Blended learninglearner engagement and competency-based medical education (CBME)medical educationteaching-learning methods

Identifiers

PMID42701579
PMCPMC13545890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.