ArticleBMC medical education2026
Application of the modified Mini-CEX combined with the SBAR model in the experimental teaching of health assessment course: a quasi-experimental 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to explore the effects of the modified Mini-Clinical Evaluation Exercise (Mini-CEX) combined with the Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation (SBAR) model in the experimental teaching of Health Assessment course.
backgroundThe Mini-cex and the SBAR model are widely used in clinical nursing to improve nurses' operational skills and general competence. However, there is a lack of evidence to indicate that their combination can produce a synergistic effect on undergraduates' multiple abilities, such as autonomous learning and critical thinking.
designQuasi-experimental.
methodsThis study included 311 nursing students in two parallel classes at a nursing college and divided them into an intervention group (155 students) and a control group (156 students). In the intervention group, an modified Mini-CEX combined with the SBAR teaching method was adopted, and the teaching process included classroom scenario simulation and clinical apprenticeship. In the control group, conventional teaching methods were used. At the end of the course, the 2 groups of students were compared in terms of independent learning ability, critical thinking ability, nurse empathy, attitude toward communication skills, and course achievement.
resultsAfter intervention, the total independent learning ability score(110.20±6.37 vs. 98.79±7.57), the total critical thinking ability score(295.43±15.34 vs. 272.52±13.85), the total empathy ability score(93.08±7.61 vs. 86.22±6.82), the positive scores of students' attitudes toward communication skills score(50.35±3.95 vs. 46.58±4.27), and the clinical skills assessment score(78.83±8.81 vs. 74.82±9.41) of the students in the intervention group were significantly higher than those of control group, and with a statistically significant difference (p <0.01). There was no statistically significant difference in the total theoretical examination score (p >0.05).
conclusionThe application of the modified Mini-CEX combined with the SBAR model in the experimental teaching of Health Assessment course had a positive effect on students, which can improve students' clinical practice abilities and comprehensive clinical quality. The model can be further promoted in the future to improve the quality of teaching and students' professional abilities.
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.