Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41764461›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2026

Blended-learning with half the face-to-face time versus conventional abdominal ultrasound training in undergraduate medical education: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.

Laura Butennandt, Tina Stibane, Andreas Mayr, Felix Mühlensiepen, Helmut Sitter, Johannes Knitza

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialEquivalence Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Laura ButennandtDr. Reinfried Pohl Center for Medical Education, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Tina StibaneDr. Reinfried Pohl Center for Medical Education, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Andreas MayrInstitute for Medical Biometry and Statistics, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Felix MühlensiepenCenter for Health Services Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Rüdersdorf, Germany.
Helmut Sitter *Dr. Reinfried Pohl Center for Medical Education, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Johannes Knitza *Institute for Digital Medicine, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Baldingerstrasse 1, Marburg, 35043, Germany. knitza@uni-marburg.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUltrasonography is an essential clinical tool, offering rapid, bedside, imaging that supports timely clinical decision-making. Its effectiveness, however, depends heavily on examiner skill, requiring structured, practice-oriented training. Traditional tutor-led ultrasound teaching is limited by personnel and resource shortages. Blended learning, combining self-directed digital preparation with targeted hands-on teaching, may help overcome these constraints while maintaining educational quality. This randomized controlled non-inferiority trial evaluated whether a blended-learning abdomen ultrasound curriculum with reduced face-to-face teaching is as effective as a conventional full-day peer-teaching course.

methodsClinical-phase medical students at Philipps University Marburg were eligible to participate. After enrollment and written informed consent, students were randomized to either a conventional one-day (8-hour) face-to-face curriculum or a blended-learning curriculum consisting of online preparatory modules, followed by a shortened, 4-hour hands-on session. Both formats were delivered by trained student peer tutors. The primary outcome was performance in an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE; 0–20 points). Secondary outcomes included theoretical knowledge assessed through a written test (0–20 points) and student perceptions measured via a Likert-scale questionnaire.

resultsA total of 118 students were randomized (60 blended learning; 58 conventional). Blended learning was non-inferior to the conventional curriculum in OSCE performance (14.68 ± 2.72 vs. 14.86 ± 2.67; mean difference 0.18; 95% CI − 0.80 to 1.16), with the confidence interval fully within the non-inferiority margin of Δ = 4. Mean theoretical knowledge scores did not differ significantly (16.35 ± 2.74 vs. 16.59 ± 2.69; p = 0.35). Student evaluations indicated high perceived knowledge and skills gain in both groups, with comparable acceptance and course organization ratings.

conclusionsA blended-learning curriculum that shifts theoretical instruction from face-to-face teaching to structured self-directed online preparation, was non-inferior to a conventional full-day ultrasound course in teaching practical abdominal ultrasound skills. This approach provides an effective and resource-efficient strategy to broaden access to ultrasound education while preserving instructional quality.

trial registrationNot applicable.

Indexed as

AbdomenEducation, Medical, UndergraduateClinical CompetenceCurriculumEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansMaleUltrasonographyYoung AdultAbdominal ultrasound trainingBlended learningClinical skills acquisitionCompetency-based trainingUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID41764461
PMCPMC13059292

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.