BMC Medical Education最新文献

Introduction: In recent decades, numerous studies have explored Problem-based Learning (PBL) or Case-based Learning (CBL) alone, but few have investigated their combination. Fundamental nursing is a core course for nursing undergraduates, and anaphylactic shock (a life-threatening clinical emergency) is a key teaching content. Traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) lacks interaction and fails to enhance critical thinking, highlighting the need for teaching methods.

Methods: Nursing undergraduates from a medical college were randomly divided into two groups (n=50 each): the traditional group (LBL) and the PBL-CBL group (combined method). The intervention focused on anaphylactic shock in fundamental nursing (September 2022-June 2024). Data were collected via post-class tests (theoretical, practical, case analysis) and anonymous questionnaires (California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory, satisfaction, time consumption). Statistical analysis used SPSS 18.0.

Results: The PBL-CBL group had significantly higher total test scores (87.33±4.21 vs. 73.32±3.66, P<0.001) and better performance in all test sections. Questionnaire results showed higher critical thinking scores (truth-seeking, analytical skills, etc.), course satisfaction, and teacher-student interaction in the PBL-CBL group, though it consumed more learning time (P<0.05).

Discussion: The combined PBL-CBL method outperforms traditional LBL in deepening knowledge, enhancing clinical analysis ability, and improving critical thinking. It is a promising approach for fundamental nursing teaching, though it requires more student preparation time.

Background: Cancer care requires collaboration across specialties, making interprofessional education essential. The INTERACT-EUROPE 100 project promotes interprofessional cancer care by implementing the Inter-Specialty Cancer Training Program (ISCTP) on a larger scale across Europe. This study aimed to co-adapt a comprehensive evaluation framework to assess the impact of the ISCTP, with the broader goal of informing evaluation practices in other educational programs in cancer care. A modified three-round Delphi study was conducted involving cancer care experts and patient representatives. In the first round, 61 participants responded to three open-ended questions in written form to gather their perspectives on key aspects to consider when evaluating the ISCTP. Thematic analysis of these responses yielded twelve overarching statements that were subsequently prioritized by 46 participants in the second round using a ranking task. The third and final round consisted of two cross-national online focus group discussions (n = 15), which allowed for the contextualization of these findings. ISCTP evaluation priorities were defined at various levels: assessing program satisfaction through feedback on content relevance, interactivity (e.g., collaborative exercises), and participant engagement through attendance and active participation. Additionally, emphasis was placed on evaluating both declarative knowledge acquisition and the application of procedural knowledge, as well as competence assessment using culturally sensitive rubrics. Overall, findings underscore the need to measure participant performance through satisfaction, behavioral changes, and patient-centered outcomes to successfully implement existing evaluation frameworks. Having incorporated interest-holder perspectives, these findings provide a robust and patient-centered foundation for a comprehensive ISCTP evaluation.

Background: Digital literacy and scientific creativity are becoming significant concerns in the cultivation of professional and innovative talents within medical higher education, particularly given the widespread application of digital technology in modern medicine. Although existing studies suggest a link between digital skills and students' performance, research specifically focusing on the relationship between digital literacy and scientific creativity remains limited. Furthermore, the internal mechanisms through which digital literacy influences scientific creativity have not been clearly elucidated. Knowledge conversion, as conceptualized in the SECI model, may mediate this relationship. This study aims to explore the relationship between digital literacy and scientific creativity among medical students and assesses the mediating role of knowledge conversion and its four dimensions.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 770 medical students from Central South University (December 2024 to March 2025) was conducted using digital literacy scales, scientific creativity scales, and knowledge conversion scales. SPSS 24.0 and AMOS software were used to analyze the data, with mediating effects specifically examined via the Hayes PROCESS macro.

Results: Digital literacy exhibited a significant positive effect on medical students' scientific creativity. Mediation analysis revealed that knowledge conversion served as a significant mediator, explaining the vast majority of this effect, which underscores its role as a primary pathway. However, a significant direct effect of digital literacy remained, thus confirming a partial mediation model. Among the dimensions of knowledge conversion, externalization emerged as the most potent mediator.

Conclusions: This study highlights the significant role of digital literacy in directly enhancing the scientific creativity of medical students, as well as the mediating effect of knowledge transformation, particularly in its externalization dimension. The findings provide valuable insights for educational interventions, indicating that strategies should not only focus on digital skills but also integrate knowledge management training. Furthermore, the proposed DLSC-SECI model provides a theoretical framework for systematic training aimed at improving the scientific creativity of medical students in the digital era.

Background: Although curiosity in medicine is associated with many benefits, the literature is generally sparse or anecdotal. We seek to contribute to the understanding of curiosity by exploring its perception in the context of undergraduate medical education.

Methods: Given its subjective and abstract concept, we utilised a qualitative approach in this research. Focus groups and one-to-one semi structured interviews with medical students, clinical teachers and senior curriculum leaders were undertaken. Data collected was thematically analysed using Braun and Clarke model.

Results: All participants felt curiosity was important for learning and patient care. Curiosity was perceived to be a dynamic process - from the initial stage of knowledge acquisition to holistic practice. Teachers were identified as agents to nurture curiosity. Positive role modelling, enthusiasm in teaching and effective teaching styles were some ways to achieve this. Exams were deemed to hinder the development of curiosity. Participants felt curiosity could be nurtured through an ad-hoc basis during students' day-to-day placement and structured learning activities.

Conclusions: We recommend that medical schools review their existing curriculum to identify more opportunities for curiosity development and eliminate potential barriers. Regular workshops for teachers could raise awareness on nurturing curiosity and to develop effective teaching skills.

Background: Basic research is essential for the development of dental science, and the demand for medical doctors involved in basic research is increasing. However, the enthusiasm and resolve to engage in basic science research has declined, as understanding the necessity of and conducting basic science research with clinical observations are challenging for students. In addition, the increasing need to implement cross-disciplinarity in dental research activities has even weakened research innovation. In response, the School of Stomatology launched a programme named the Academic Career Planning Course of Stomatology Students (ACPCSS) in 2022. This study evaluated the programme's effectiveness in enhancing dental students' enthusiasm, commitment, and innovation in basic research.

Methods: The programme has set up three modules to facilitate on-site or online lectures on the necessity of basic science in stomatology subdisciplines to strengthen students' enthusiasm, and the approaches of clinical-research integration to develop their resolve, and cross-disciplinary research innovation with dental science. In the cross-sectional study, questionnaires were distributed to evaluate the effect of the programme. Retrospective analyses compared academic performance-measured by publications and funded research projects-among students with different levels of lecture participation.

Results: To date, the programme has held 22 lectures, and a total of 3357 participants have attended. The participating dental students have engaged in more scientific activities, including publishing more research papers and multidisciplinary papers and acquiring more funded projects. ACPCSS is associated with improved dental students' awareness of the necessity of research, increased resolve to engage in basic science, and enhanced innovation in dental research.

Conclusion: The ACPCSS project has cultivated participants' enthusiasm, resolve, and innovative abilities in scientific research. This was accomplished through three dedicated training modules, which emphasized: the necessity of research in dental subspecialties, clinical research integration methodology, and cross-disciplinary research exploration.