Claims

Basic science retention varies by discipline, with anatomy retained best and microbiology lowest

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

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Retention scores differ across basic science disciplines: anatomy mean scores ranged from 45.0 to 82.9%, while microbiology had the lowest mean score of 39.1 ± 18%. → Albert Francis A. 2024

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 knowledge-test studies among interns: biochemistry mean 45.3 ± 15.8%, pharmacology 45.1 ± 19.7%, and "Microbiology had the lowest mean score of 39.1 ± 18%". Percentages are descriptive; no standardised effect size printed.

"Biochemistry and pharmacology showed similar retention scores with mean scores of 45.3 ± 15.8% [44] and 45.1 ± 19.7% [46], respectively. Microbiology had the lowest mean score of 39.1 ± 18% [40]."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.