Critical Thinking Level among Medical Sciences Students in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Critical thinking is one of the most important missions of the educational planning system of medical sciences universities around the world. Hence, identifying the level of critical thinking skills and tendency of medical sciences students to think critically is of great importance. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to examine the critical thinking level in medical sciences students in Iran. Methods. To extract published studies in the field of critical thinking in Iran, a search was conducted in the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, and Magiran. The keywords of critical thinking, medical sciences, and Iran were used for the purpose of the search in the two languages of Persian and English and without any time limit. The PRISMA flow diagram was applied for the selection of articles, and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used for the evaluation of these papers. Results. After evaluating the quality of searched articles, 80 articles were finally selected for the final analysis. The total sample of the articles included 12,578 students. The results indicated that out of 51 articles conducted in the field of critical thinking skills, 48 articles reported these skills at a low level, 2 papers at a medium level, and only 1 paper at a high level in the medical sciences students. Among 29 articles in the field of the level of critical thinking disposition, 13 articles reported their tendency level at a low level, 11 articles at a medium level, and 5 articles at a high level. Conclusion. In general, based on most articles, the level of critical thinking skills in the medical sciences students in Iran was reported to be at a low level and their tendency to critical thinking at a moderate level and low level. Therefore, given the importance of critical thinking for medical sciences students, future studies should consider factors influencing the increase of the critical thinking level in these students. In this regard, formation of some training workshops can also be promising. Furthermore, reviewing the medical sciences curriculum should be taken into consideration by the policymakers and educational planners so as to strengthen the level of critical thinking in the medical sciences students.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".