Purpose: Understanding the psychological characteristics of contemporary medical students is essential for effective educational design and learner support. This study aimed to identify medical students’ personality types using a geometric personality assessment tool (GEOPIA), determine whether differences exist by gender, age, or academic level, and explore the practical utility of such profiling for supporting educational practices in medical school settings. Methods: The 40-item Korean Geometric Psychological Assessment (GEOPIA) was administered to 1,173 students across 5 Korean medical schools. GEOPIA classifies individuals into 4 primary types—Round (sociable, relationship-oriented), Triangle (task-oriented, challenging), Box (prudent, stability-seeking), and Curve (creative, sensitive). Frequency analyses and χ2 tests were conducted. Of the 1,016 respondents (response rate, 86.61%), 981 were included in the final analysis. Results: The most common primary type was Round (40.3%), followed by Box (31.7%), Triangle (15.2%), and Curve (12.8%). Across the 12 combined profiles, Round–Box (21.9%) was the most prevalent, followed by Box–Round (19.0%) and Round–Triangle (9.7%). No significant differences were observed by gender (χ2=6.360, P=0.095, Cramer’s V=0.082), age (χ2=11.454, P=0.490, Cramer’s V=0.065), or academic level (χ2=18.044, P=0.260, Cramer’s V=0.078). Conclusion GEOPIA may provide a practical tool for identifying learner characteristics and supporting educational decision-making in medical school settings. In instructional design, personality-type data can inform group formation, activity planning, and assignment structure. In student support, the tool offers instructors and advisors a quick way to understand learners’ characteristics, which may help guide individualized counseling and promote effective learning experiences.

Purpose: Socioeconomic disadvantage remains a major determinant of equitable access to, and progression within, medical education. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines both the impact and the magnitude of financial and economic disadvantage on student selection and progression in medical school. Methods: Studies were included if they reported associations between socioeconomic indicators (e.g., parental income, occupation, education, geographic deprivation, or premedical debt) and selection or progression outcomes, and were excluded if they lacked clearly defined economic predictors or sufficient data for binary effect sizes. Searches were conducted across PubMed, Scopus, ERIC, Embase, ProQuest, and EBSCO (2005–2025). Study selection employed an active machine-learning screening process. Extracted data included sample characteristics, socioeconomic measures, and outcome types, with risk of bias assessed using the Risk of Bias Instrument. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted where appropriate. Results: Thirty-two studies of medical programs were included, yielding 28 effect sizes for selection and 9 for progression. Household economic and educational disadvantage, identified through parental indices, was consistently associated with reduced odds of admission (odds ratio [OR], 0.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55–0.65) and poorer progression (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.53–0.59). Geographic deprivation also exerted a negative effect, particularly on selection (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.5–0.93). Conclusion Socioeconomic disadvantage exerts a pervasive influence across the medical education continuum. Addressing these inequities requires sustained financial, academic, and psychosocial support both before and during their studies. Students’ economic circumstances should therefore be considered in medical school selection policy and curriculum development to further enhance equity within medical schools and the profession.

Purpose: This study aimed to develop pilot clinical skills assessment (CSA) modules for Korean medicine-specific procedures and to examine their preliminary appropriateness, perceived necessity, and feasibility as a foundation for future licensing-related assessment development. Methods: A participatory action research framework, supplemented by qualitative interviews, was used to develop 4 CSA modules—acupuncture, Chuna manual therapy, pulse diagnosis, and constitutional diagnosis—in collaboration with expert evaluators, students, and standardized patients. The modules were implemented as formative examinations for third-year Korean medicine students, after which semi-structured interviews were conducted to obtain feedback on module content, implementation processes, and scoring procedures. Each module was also reviewed using the RUMBA checklist (Realistic, Understandable, Measurable, Behavioral, and Achievable), together with ratings of perceived necessity and feasibility for possible future use in licensing-related assessment. Interview data were analyzed inductively at the level of individual responses and then compared across modules and participant groups. Results: Qualitative analysis yielded 3 themes: content and scoring criteria, physical environment or simulators, and education or training. Participants emphasized the need to make key aspects of performance more observable, improve authenticity through simulators or task trainers, and strengthen the capacity of scoring systems to distinguish between levels of student performance. Across all modules, mean RUMBA scores were high in the understandable, behavioral, and achievable domains, whereas measurability was more problematic, especially for pulse diagnosis. Conclusion These pilot findings clarify both the strengths and the limitations of Korean medicine-specific CSA modules. The modules received favorable ratings for understandability and achievability, whereas lower ratings for measurability and realism identified priorities for refinement before wider use. This study provides preliminary guidance for the continued development and broader evaluation of Korean medicine-specific performance assessments.

Clinical reasoning is a core competency in medical practice; however, deficits in this domain among residents are often difficult to identify and remediate because of its cognitive complexity and the absence of standardized assessment approaches. This scoping review aimed to map and analyze existing evidence on strategies to remediate clinical reasoning skill deficits in underperforming medical residents. Using the Arksey and O’Malley framework as refined by Levac and his colleagues, and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, Web of Science, SpringerLink, ProQuest, and EBSCOhost for studies published between 2000 and 2024. Definitions of clinical reasoning, underperformance, and remediation were adopted from prior literature. Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising original research and literature reviews in multiple medical specialties. Methods for identifying clinical reasoning deficits included written, oral, and performance-based assessments, as well as routine workplace-based evaluations. Remediation strategies ranged from structured institutional programs to individualized, case-specific interventions, with coaching, deliberate practice, guided reflection, and structured thinking frameworks frequently employed. Two studies reported positive outcomes following completion of remediation for clinical reasoning deficits. Key enablers included psychological safety, learner engagement, and accessible faculty support, whereas barriers included learner resistance, inadequate baseline knowledge, faculty skill limitations, and institutional resource constraints. Effective remediation requires early identification, comprehensive diagnostic assessment, and tailored, coaching-based interventions supported by institutional commitment. Nonetheless, substantial variability in definitions, remediation protocols, and evaluation methods highlights the need for greater standardization and further research across diverse contexts to inform evidence-based frameworks for clinical reasoning remediation.

Purpose: To primarily examine the feasibility of implementing eye-tracking–based feedback within a virtual reality (VR) trauma simulation with realistically simulated emergency department interruptions, and to explore preliminary changes in situational awareness (SA) (primary outcome), Advanced Trauma Life Support (ATLS) performance, and trauma-management errors (exploratory outcomes) compared with conventional mannequin-based simulation. Methods: In this pilot randomized pretest–posttest study, 35 medical interns were assigned to VR training with eye-tracking heatmap feedback (n=17) or mannequin-based training with instructor verbal feedback (n=18). SA (modified Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique), ATLS checklist performance, and trauma-management error scores were measured before and after the intervention. Within-group changes were tested with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and between-group differences were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test on change scores (Δ=post−pre), with effect sizes reported as r. Results: Baseline pretest performance did not differ significantly between the groups. Both groups improved in SA and ATLS performance (all P<0.001) and reduced error scores (VR: P=0.004; mannequin: P<0.001). In exploratory between-group comparisons, the VR group showed numerically greater improvements in SA (mean change 6.59 vs. 3.11; P=0.006, r=0.46), ATLS performance (22.12 vs. 8.22; P=0.003, r=0.48), and error reduction (–9.36 vs. –3.61; P=0.005, r=0.47). Given the pilot design, these differences should be interpreted as preliminary signals. Conclusion In this pilot study, both training modalities were associated with improved SA and ATLS performance and with fewer errors, with point estimates favoring the VR condition. These preliminary signals suggest that VR with eye-tracking feedback may be a promising option for trauma training in interruption-rich, emergency department-like settings and warrants further evaluation in larger studies.

Purpose: The objectives of this study were to develop a 2-item abbreviated version of the Program Sense of Belonging questionnaire (ProSBq) and to evaluate its ability to identify student physical therapists with relatively low valued competence and social acceptance. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using survey data from 634 students enrolled in physical therapist education programs across the United States. The 10-item ProSBq was used to assess 2 dimensions of belonging: valued competence and social acceptance. Principal component analysis was performed to identify representative items for each subscale, with 1 item selected per subscale. Pearson product-moment correlations were used to examine relationships between the single items and their corresponding subscale scores. Classification performance was evaluated by assessing how accurately the single-item responses classified students reporting a relatively low sense of valued competence and social acceptance, based on their full ProSBq subscale scores. Multiple single-item response thresholds were examined to assess classification accuracy. Results: The single items demonstrated strong relationships with their corresponding subscale scores (r=0.63–0.80, with part-whole correction). For valued competence, sensitivity increased from 53.6% to 92.9%, whereas specificity decreased from 96.3% to 73.5% when a more inclusive threshold was used. A similar sensitivity-specificity tradeoff was observed for social acceptance. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses demonstrated excellent discrimination (area under the curve ≥0.90). Conclusion Single ProSBq items demonstrated strong relationships with full valued competence and social acceptance subscale scores and acceptable classification performance. The abbreviated 2-item ProSBq may provide a practical and efficient method for identifying students experiencing low valued competence or social acceptance.

Developing objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) stations is time-consuming for medical teachers. We aimed to evaluate the ability of a large language model (LLM) to generate ready-to-use OSCE stations. Five OSCE stations generated by the LLM GPT-4o were evaluated by 7 expert assessors using a 5-point Likert scale and compared with 5 teacher-written stations targeting similar learning objectives. A station was considered to be of good quality if most assessors responded “agree” or “strongly agree” to the statement “The station is good enough to be used by students.” All teacher-written stations were rated as being of good quality, compared with only one GPT-4o-generated station. The LLM produced adequate clinical scenarios when reference knowledge was provided and tasks were clearly ordered, but it failed to generate reliable assessment grids. Careful review by teachers remained essential. GPT-4o failed to consistently produce fully ready-to-use OSCE stations.

Purpose: Three-dimensional (3D)–printed models have been increasingly used in medical education, but most studies have focused on satisfaction or outcomes following isolated learning activities. This study aimed to explore students’ perceptions of learning, engagement, usability, and learning strategies after completing a series of neuroanatomy-related coloring activities using a low-cost 3D-printed model. Methods: This cross-sectional study involved Year 1 medical students at Duke-NUS Medical School. Students participated in 3 structured coloring activities using a modular 3D-printed brain model during a neuroanatomy session. An anonymous survey was administered 1 week after the third activity to assess students’ perceived learning value, engagement (behavioral, cognitive, emotional, and agentic), usability, and learning strategies using Likert-scale items and open-ended questions. Results: A total of 48 students completed the survey, and the instrument showed acceptable to high internal consistency. Students reported high perceived learning value, positive engagement across multiple domains during the coloring activity, and high usability of the model. Participation in the learning activities was associated with significantly higher behavioral and agentic engagement, perceived learning value, and greater use of learning strategies than non-participation. Overall, active manipulation and hands-on exploration were perceived as beneficial for learning. Conclusion Low-cost 3D-printed brain models may serve as valuable learning tools to complement existing anatomy teaching approaches when paired with well-designed learning activities. Students reported positive learning experiences and high engagement during the activities. These findings highlight the importance of sound pedagogical design and curriculum integration to maximize learning.