Trial reportBMC medical education2026
An integrated teaching model combining PBL and medical humanities education for pathology laboratory teaching: a randomized controlled study.
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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the educational effectiveness of an integrated teaching model combining problem-based learning (PBL) and medical humanities education for pathology laboratory teaching.
methodsThis randomized controlled study was conducted from September 2025 to January 2026 among undergraduate anesthesiology students enrolled in a pathology laboratory course at Wannan Medical University. Four classes were randomly assigned at the class level to either the experimental group, which received the integrated PBL and medical humanities teaching model (n = 56), or the control group, which received a traditional LBL teaching model (n = 59). Following the instructional intervention, theoretical examination scores, microscopic image interpretation scores, questionnaire-based teaching effectiveness outcomes, and overall student satisfaction were compared between groups.
resultsBoth groups showed significant improvements in theoretical examination scores after the intervention compared with baseline (both P < 0.001). After adjustment for class-level clustering using linear mixed-effects models, no significant between-group difference was observed in post-intervention theoretical examination scores (P = 0.122), while microscopic image interpretation scores showed a borderline between-group difference favoring the experimental group (P = 0.061). Compared with the control group, students in the experimental group achieved significantly higher scores in learning motivation, self-directed learning ability, and communication and expression skills (all P < 0.05). Teamwork ability showed a borderline between-group difference (P = 0.058), whereas differences in professional ethics awareness and understanding of healthcare-related social responsibility were not statistically significant. Overall teaching satisfaction was significantly higher in the experimental group than in the control group (P = 0.002).
conclusionCompared with traditional LBL teaching, the integrated teaching model combining PBL and medical humanities education was associated with more favorable questionnaire-based outcomes in learning motivation, self-directed learning ability, and communication and expression skills, as well as higher student satisfaction. This integrated instructional approach may provide a useful reference for the ongoing reform and improvement of pathology laboratory education.
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.