Age, curriculum type and retention interval predict basic science knowledge retention¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Age and curriculum type predicted physiological knowledge recall, with scores showing an inverse relationship with age. → Albert Francis A. 2024 q3 i? Retention interval was inversely related to scores and predicted knowledge recall in anatomy, physiology, biochemistry and pharmacology. → Albert Francis A. 2024 (2)

Evidence¶

Albert Francis A. 2024¶

Albert Francis A., Seidu Abdul-Aziz, Mason Hannah M., Anderson Emma, Alele Faith O., Heggarty Paula, Hollins Aaron, Gupta Tarun Sen, Hays Richard B., McArthur Lawrie, Malau-Aduli Bunmi S. (2024). A systematic review of medical practitioners' retention and application of basic sciences to clinical practice. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05952-8

q3 · i? · review · r3

Review synthesis of cross-sectional predictor studies (Table 2 reports β = -0.20, p < 0.01 for age; β = -0.23, p < 0.001 for curriculum type in the physiology study); the quoted synthesis sentence prints no effect size.

"Age and curriculum type were predictors of physiological knowledge recall [39]. Scores showed an inverse relationship with age, highlighting that younger doctors had a better recall of knowledge compared to their older counterparts [39]."

Albert Francis A. 2024 (2)¶

Albert Francis A., Seidu Abdul-Aziz, Mason Hannah M., Anderson Emma, Alele Faith O., Heggarty Paula, Hollins Aaron, Gupta Tarun Sen, Hays Richard B., McArthur Lawrie, Malau-Aduli Bunmi S. (2024). A systematic review of medical practitioners' retention and application of basic sciences to clinical practice. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05952-8

q3 · i? · review · r3

Review synthesis across four disciplines; Table 2 prints retention interval β = −0.31, p < 0.01 for the doctors' study. The quoted sentence itself prints no effect size, so impact is null.

"Retention interval was inversely related to scores and predicted knowledge recall/ performance in four basic science disciplines (anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, and pharmacology)."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Long-Term Memory — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Shorter retention intervals predict higher quiz grades, and the spacing benefit holds even at short retention intervals — related
• Basic science knowledge scores decline with increasing years post-graduation — related
• Children retain self-derived knowledge over a one-week delay in classroom settings, with performance increasing from Session 1 to Session 2 — related
• Rehearsal significantly optimises retention of basic science knowledge among medical practitioners — related