Den här översättningen är inte klar ännu. Den här sidan är just nu på engelska.

Gå till den engelska sidan

Cure My Disease

Don't miss your cure!

 Log in / Sign up

Digital vs. traditional: which microscope method helps med students learn better?

NCT ID NCT07302633

Knowledge-focused Sponsor: Muhammad Aamir Latif Source: ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

What the study statuses mean

This study's is highlighted.

Recruitment status, easiest to join first

Recruiting now
This trial is taking on new participants right now.
Not yet recruiting
Registered, but not yet taking participants.
By invitation only
Not open to general applications. Only people the study team invites can take part.
Paused
Paused for now. It may or may not start again.
Ongoing
Running, but no longer taking on new participants.
Completed This study
The trial has finished. Results may not be published yet.
Stopped early
Stopped early, before it reached the end. That can be for many reasons, including safety.
Cancelled
Cancelled before anyone took part.

Expanded access (not trials)

Expanded access
Not a trial. This treatment can be requested outside a study, case by case, for people who qualify.
Expanded access (paused)
Not a trial. The treatment can normally be requested outside a study, but is unavailable right now.
Expanded access (ended)
Not a trial. The treatment could once be requested outside a study, but no longer can.
Approved
The treatment has been approved, so it is available normally rather than through this programme.

When the status isn't known

Details not published
The full record has not been published yet, so there is little to show here.
Status unknown
This status has not been confirmed recently, so it may be out of date.

First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026

Summary

This study compared two ways of teaching medical students to use microscopes: the traditional method with physical microscopes and a newer digital method using computers. 350 fourth-year medical students took part to see which approach helped them learn better. The goal was to find out if virtual microscopy could be as good as or better than the old-fashioned way.

This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.

Study facts

What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.

Phase

Not a phased trial

Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.

Participants

350 people

The number who actually took part.

Started

Aug 2024

Finished

Oct 2024

Lead sponsor

Other sponsor

The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.

Who can take part

This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.

Ages

20 to 24 years

Sex

Anyone

Healthy volunteers

Accepted

You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.

Show the full entry requirements

Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.

Inclusion Criteria: * Students of either gender * Aged 20-24 years * Studying in fourth-year MBBS * Willing to participate Exclusion Criteria: * Students, absent during the interventions or assessments * Declined or withdrew consent at any stage

Get updates

Get notified about this study

Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Learning problem are added.

Vår säkerhetsrekommendation!

Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor

Conditions

The condition(s) this trial relates to.

learning disability

As listed by the trial registrant

The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.

Learning problem

Contacts and locations

Locations

  • Quaid-E-Azam Medical College

    Bahawalpur, Punjab Province, 63100, Pakistan