ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
Teaching and assessment strategies in the obstetrics and gynaecology program: medical students' perceptions evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Worldwide, medical institutions face challenges in maintaining educational quality while accommodating the growing size of student cohorts. Assessment and critical analysis of educational programmes, particularly in the clinical years, are imperative for improving learning outcomes. This study aims to evaluate students' perceptions of the teaching and assessment methods used in the obstetrics and gynaecology programme. Methods: This observational, cross-sectional study was conducted among fourth-year medical students enrolled in the obstetrics and gynaecology programme at the College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh. A total of 300 students were enrolled. An electronically generated questionnaire comprising four sections, including 19 closed questions and five open-ended questions in English, was used. The first section addressed responses on the course guide; the second and third sections evaluated students' perceptions of the various teaching and assessment methods; the fourth section collected generalised responses on students' preferences and suggestions for program improvement. The data were analysed in relation to the GPA of the students involved in the study. Results: Among the study participants, 46.2% of students were satisfied with the course programme outlines and timings, 34.2% with the clarity of the course objectives, 40.2% with the teaching methods, and 32.6% with the clarity of the assessment tools. The lowest mean agreement scores were recorded for the usefulness of skills lab sessions in achieving clinical objectives. There were significant differences between genders ( Conclusion: This study shows that students were satisfied with the newly introduced teaching and assessment methods. However, student satisfaction rates do not appear to be related to student achievements. Moreover, satisfaction was lower regarding the course guide and the educational and assessment methodologies. The study highlights the need to review the clinical skills laboratory, its educational components, and students' tasks.
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.