ArticleScientific reports2026
Perceptions and motivations toward critical thinking among health science students in northern Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Critical thinking (CT) is a vital competency for future healthcare providers, as it enables effective decision-making, problem-solving, and the delivery of patient care in increasingly complex clinical environments. This study examined perceptions, motivations, and factors associated with CT. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 330 medical and other health science students using a validated questionnaire. Spearman’s correlation coefficient was used to assess the relationship between the two domains. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine predictors of perception and motivation toward CT. The majority of participants demonstrated low to medium levels of perception of and motivation toward CT. More than 60% of students reported receiving frequent institutional support, whereas only 58% reported receiving support from their academic advisors for CT development. Female students had significantly higher perception scores (p = 0.029), and nursing students demonstrated higher perception levels than medical students (p = 0.016). Obese students exhibited lower perception (p = 0.012) and motivation scores (p = 0.008). Strategies to improve students’ perceptions of and motivation toward CT are recommended to foster the advanced clinical reasoning skills required for high-quality healthcare delivery. These strategies include enhancing opportunities for interprofessional collaboration and integrating practice-oriented CT activities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.