ArticleMedicine2026
Research on the student-centered research feedback experimental teaching model to enhance the effectiveness of pharmacology experimental teaching.
Article 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most traditional pharmacological experimental projects are confirmatory experiments, and students are always in a passive training position, lacking critical thinking. This model does not emphasize the training of students' research ideas and the improvement of their innovation abilities. This study included undergraduate students from 4 classes of integrated traditional Chinese and Western medicine clinical majors at Anhui University of Chinese Medicine who enrolled in 2023. They were divided into a traditional pharmacology experimental teaching model (TPETM) group (130 students) and a research feedback pharmacology experimental teaching model (RFPETM) group (129 students). We conducted a quantitative evaluation of the learning process, correlation analysis, and student questionnaire surveys to investigate the effect of RFPETM on improving the teaching effectiveness of pharmacology experiments. Our research showed that there was no difference in population composition between the TPETM group and RFPETM group students, which did not affect the statistical analysis of this study. Quantitative evaluation of learning process showed that RFPETM significantly improved students' scores in pharmacology experimental courses at different stages. The RFPETM group showed a significant correlation between student classroom performance scores and final scores, while no such correlation was observed in the TPETM group, suggesting that the improvement of students' grades in the RFPETM group was related to their classroom performance. We conducted a questionnaire survey on "Student knowledge acquisition" among the RFPETM students, and the results showed that the majority of students believed that RFPETM teaching helped their knowledge acquisition, and the evaluation was positive. The questionnaire survey also showed that students affirmed the role of RFPETM in teaching methods, students' learning experiences, and the cultivation of innovative abilities. RFPETM teaching was beneficial for pharmacology experimental teaching and helped students cultivate their innovative 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.