ArticleThe clinical teacher2026
Near-Peer Anatomy-Anchored Teaching.
Article in The clinical teacher, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Near-Peer Anatomy-Anchored Teaching.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe transition from pre-clinical to clinical medicine is challenging, particularly in applying anatomical knowledge to patient care. Reductions in dedicated anatomy teaching time have compounded this. Near-peer teaching may help address this gap by reducing hierarchy and enhancing psychological safety, though few programmes have explicitly targeted the pre-clinical to clinical transition through the integration of anatomy with clinical cases. APPROACH: A prospective educational evaluation examined a near-peer, case-based orthopaedic anatomy programme delivered to Year 4 medical students by Year 5 facilitators across four sessions. Knowledge acquisition was assessed using parallel pre- and post-session multiple-choice question (MCQ) sets compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Cohen's d EVALUATION: Thirty-two matched pairs were available for analysis. Baseline anatomical confidence (mean 2.76/5) and ratings of placement-based anatomy teaching (mean 2.26/5) indicated clear unmet need. MCQ scores improved significantly from 5.0 to 7.0 out of 8 (mean 5.00 vs. 6.69, p < 0.001, Cohen's d IMPLICATIONS: This programme provides preliminary support for near-peer, case-based anatomy teaching as a promising approach to supporting the pre-clinical to clinical transition, demonstrating short-term improvements in MCQ performance, confidence and student satisfaction.
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.