<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "archivearticle.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="systematic-review" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Med.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Medicine</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Med.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2296-858X</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fmed.2025.1522830</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Medicine</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Systematic Review</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Effectiveness of Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction in health professions education: a systematic review and meta-analysis</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Yue</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2537169/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/data-curation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/software/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/validation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Liang</surname> <given-names>Zhengjv</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/data-curation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Zhongyan</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"><sup>3</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/validation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Yu</surname> <given-names>Yuhuan</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff4"><sup>4</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/software/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>Qing</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Xiao</given-names></name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="c001"><sup>&#x002A;</sup></xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1"><sup>1</sup><institution>Nursing College of Yunnan University of Traditional Chinese Medicine</institution>, <addr-line>Kunming, Yunnan</addr-line>, <country>China</country></aff>
<aff id="aff2"><sup>2</sup><institution>Honghe Prefecture Third People&#x2019;s Hospital</institution>, <addr-line>Gejiu, Yunnan</addr-line>, <country>China</country></aff>
<aff id="aff3"><sup>3</sup><institution>DeHong Vocational College</institution>, <addr-line>DeHong, Yunnan</addr-line>, <country>China</country></aff>
<aff id="aff4"><sup>4</sup><institution>Honghe Prefecture Yunnan Central Hospital</institution>, <addr-line>Gejiu, Yunnan</addr-line>, <country>China</country></aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by" id="fn0001">
<p>Edited by: Shaista S. Guraya, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by" id="fn0002">
<p>Reviewed by: Preman Rajalingam, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates</p>
<p>Prakash Ramdass, St. George&#x2019;s University, Grenada</p>
<p>Shilpa Karkera, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland</p>
</fn>
<corresp id="c001">&#x002A;Correspondence: Xiao Li, <email>1877661038@qq.com</email></corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>08</day>
<month>04</month>
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>12</volume>
<elocation-id>1522830</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>05</day>
<month>11</month>
<year>2024</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>24</day>
<month>03</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#x00A9; 2025 Li, Liang, Li, Yu, Yang and Li.</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2025</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Li, Liang, Li, Yu, Yang and Li</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<sec id="sec1">
<title>Objective</title>
<p>This review assesses the effectiveness of Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction in improving theoretical scores and clinical practice abilities in medical education.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec2">
<title>Methods</title>
<p>This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two researchers conducted a comprehensive search of Chinese and English electronic databases (Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CNKI, VIP, Wanfang). The participants included clinical medical students, nursing students, specialized medical students, and medical interns, among others related to healthcare. Educators used Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction to guide these populations in theoretical learning and/or daily clinical practice. The search was conducted from the inception of the databases to February 27, 2025. Two researchers independently identified, selected, and extracted data from the studies, assessed the quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, and performed meta-analyses using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 17.0.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec3">
<title>Results</title>
<p>A total of 11 studies involving 825 participants were included in the meta-analysis, including 5 RCTs and 6 CSs. In the cumulative meta-analysis, compared with the traditional LBL model, Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction significantly improved learners&#x2019; KES (SMD 1.55, 95% CI: 0.81 to 2.29; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001), PS (SMD 1.83, 95% CI: 1.19 to 2.47; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001), LC (OR 4.92, 95% CI: 3.13 to 7.73; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.0001), and TS (OR 7.86, 95% CI: 3.22 to 19.20; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.0001).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec4">
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>The meta-analysis indicated that, compared to traditional medical teaching models, Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction are significantly effective in health professions education and can effectively enhance learners&#x2019; KES, PS, LC, and TS.</p>
</sec>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction</kwd>
<kwd>Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s instructional theory</kwd>
<kwd>clinical medicine</kwd>
<kwd>health professions education</kwd>
<kwd>medical students</kwd>
<kwd>nursing education</kwd>
<kwd>traditional teaching</kwd>
<kwd>meta-analysis</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts>
<fig-count count="8"/>
<table-count count="5"/>
<equation-count count="0"/>
<ref-count count="42"/>
<page-count count="12"/>
<word-count count="6368"/>
</counts>
<custom-meta-wrap>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>section-at-acceptance</meta-name>
<meta-value>Healthcare Professions Education</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec sec-type="intro" id="sec5">
<label>1</label>
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Robert Mills Gagn&#x00E9; proposed that learning is a dynamic process formed by interacting internal cognitive activities and the external environment, through which learners construct a comprehensive cognitive structure containing meaning, attitude, and motivation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>). Gagn&#x00E9; creatively put forward the &#x201C;9 Events of Instruction&#x201D; model to optimize this process, closely integrating instructional design with human cognitive processing mechanisms and emphasizing the correspondence between external teaching interventions and internal learning stages (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>).</p>
<p>Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction construct a complete teaching loop in a linear sequence, with the core of activating and guiding internal cognitive processing through external events (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>). Specifically, the model starts with &#x201C;Gain Attention&#x201D; to stimulate learning motivation, then establishes cognitive expectations through &#x201C;Inform Learners of Objectives&#x201D;; subsequently, it achieves knowledge connection with &#x201C;Stimulate Recall of Prior Learning,&#x201D; inputs new information with &#x201C;Present Stimulus,&#x201D; and promotes meaning construction with &#x201C;Provide Learner Guidance.&#x201D; In the output phase, &#x201C;Elicit Performance&#x201D; tests the level of understanding, &#x201C;Provide Feedback&#x201D; reinforces correct responses, &#x201C;Assess Performance&#x201D; measures the degree of goal achievement, and finally, &#x201C;Enhance Retention and Transfer&#x201D; realizes the internalization and application of knowledge (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>). This theoretical framework reveals the scientific logic of teaching activities. It provides a systematic and operable path for modern instructional design, with its influence continuously permeating fields such as educational technology and curriculum development.</p>
<p>The application research of Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction is mainly focused on university subject studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5 ref6 ref7">5&#x2013;7</xref>). It has broken the traditional teaching design where educators unilaterally impart knowledge and learners passively accept it. Educators, based on different subjects and with learners as the main body, advocate cultivating learners&#x2019; interest in learning and giving full play to their initiative during the teaching process. The learning design focuses on breaking down complex knowledge into simple knowledge, making abstract knowledge more tangible, and presenting it in the best way that learners can accept, following a process from easy to difficult, shallow to deep, and step by step (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>). In the final stage, assessment and feedback are carried out to point out the existing shortcomings and problems, further deepening learning (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>).</p>
<p>Health professions education requires high theoretical learning ability and practical operation skills. At the same time, the content of health professions education courses is more abstract and complex than other subjects, making learning more challenging (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>). The traditional teaching method (Lecture-based Learning) is mainly educator-centered, with learners passively listening under the conventional teaching guidance, leading to unstable knowledge mastery and poor overall teaching effect (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>). Moreover, the traditional teaching method focuses on textbook content, emphasizing theoretical knowledge while neglecting practical training. This method is increasingly unsuitable for medical teaching emphasizing clinical practice (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>).</p>
<p>How to change teaching methods to make complex medical knowledge easy to understand and leave a deep impression on learners with fragmented knowledge is a problem faced by current teaching reform (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>). Traditional teaching models can no longer fully adapt to the continuous development of medical education and the rapidly increasing volume of course knowledge. Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction has achieved good educational results in health professions education (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>), but its application is relatively late and lacks high-level evidence. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction compared to traditional medical teaching in health professions education, including KES, PS, LC, and TS.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="methods" id="sec6">
<label>2</label>
<title>Methods</title>
<p>This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>) and included a systematic review and a meta-analysis. The completed PRISMA checklist is provided as <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary material S1</xref>. Additionally, this review was conducted by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>).</p>
<sec id="sec7">
<label>2.1</label>
<title>Systematic review methodology</title>
<sec id="sec8">
<label>2.1.1</label>
<title>Data sources and search strategy</title>
<p>Computer searches were conducted in China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), Wanfang Database (WANGFANG DATA), as well as PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The search period was from the inception of the databases to February 27, 2025. For the Chinese search, taking CNKI as an example: &#x201C;(Subject: Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s instructional theory) OR (Subject: Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s theory) OR (Subject: Nine-event teaching method) OR (Subject: Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s teaching model)&#x201D; AND &#x201C;(Title, Keywords, Abstract: Medicine (fuzzy)) OR (Title, Keywords, Abstract: Clinical medicine (fuzzy)) OR (Title, Keywords, Abstract: Nursing (fuzzy)) OR (Title, Keywords, Abstract: Specialized medical students (fuzzy)) OR (Title, Keywords, Abstract: Interns (fuzzy)).&#x201D; For the English search, taking PubMed as an example: (((((Gagne&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction [Title/Abstract]) OR (Gagne&#x2019;s Nine Steps of Instructional Design [Title/Abstract])) OR (Gagne&#x2019;s Model of Instructional Design [Title/Abstract])) OR (Gagne&#x2019;s Model of Instructional Design [Title/Abstract])) OR (nine events [Title/Abstract])) AND (((((Education) OR (Nursing)) OR (clinical)) OR (medicine)) OR (Student)). Additionally, we conducted partial searches on Google Scholar to review relevant gray literature. We also used the &#x201C;snowballing method&#x201D; to screen the reference lists of relevant studies to identify further studies that met the criteria. The search strategy is provided as <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM2">Supplementary material S2</xref>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec9">
<label>2.1.2</label>
<title>Inclusion and exclusion criteria</title>
<p>Two researchers independently screened the retrieved literature. When the two researchers disagreed, they first discussed to reach a decision. A third researcher made the judgment if consensus still could not be reached. The following inclusion criteria were used according to PICOS (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab1">Table 1</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab1">
<label>Table 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Inclusion criteria based on PICOS in this systematic review and meta-analysis.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Population</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Clinical medical students, nursing students, specialized medical students, and medical interns, among others related to healthcare (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref42">42</xref>).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Intervention</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Gagne&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction: (Gain attention, Inform learners of objectives, Stimulate recall of prior learning, Present stimulus, Provide learner guidance, Elicit performance, Provide feedback, Assess performance, Enhance Retention and Transfer)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Comparison</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Lecture-based Learning (LBL): It is defined as a teaching model that is educator&#x2014;centered and primarily focused on one&#x2014;way knowledge transmission.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" rowspan="2">Outcomes</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Primary Outcomes:<break/>Knowledge Examination Score (KES): Quantitatively assessed through standardized written tests or course&#x2014;final exams.<break/>Practice Score (PS): Scores based on simulated operations, clinical skills assessments, or Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCE).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Secondary Outcomes:<break/>Learning Compliance (LC): Measured by attendance rate, classroom participation, or task completion rate.<break/>Teaching Satisfaction (TS): Assessed using an efficient self-administered satisfaction questionnaire.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Study design</td>
<td align="left" valign="top">Only Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and prospective Cohort Studies (CS) were included to control for confounding factors and ensure the rigor of causal inference.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<p>Exclusion Criteria: Review articles or case reports; Lack of primary outcomes or insufficient data; Non-comparative studies; Non-medical courses; Non-English and non-Chinese articles.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec10">
<label>2.1.3</label>
<title>Risk of bias assessment</title>
<p>According to the Cochrane bias risk assessment recommendations, the revised tool RoB 2.0 for assessing the risk of bias in RCTs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>) was used to evaluate the bias risk in five domains (randomization process, deviation from intended interventions, missing outcome data, measurement of the outcome, and selection of the reported result) of the studies, and finally classified the bias risk of the studies into low, medium, or high risk. For non-RCTs, the risk of bias in non-randomized studies tool ROBINS-I was used to evaluate the bias risk of the primary outcomes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">20</xref>), which was assessed from seven domains including confounding bias, selection bias of participants, classification bias of interventions, deviation bias from intended interventions, bias due to missing data, bias in measurement of outcomes, and selective reporting bias, and finally classified the bias risk of the studies into low, medium, high, or serious risk. Two independent researchers completed the double-blind assessment, and when consensus could not be reached, a third senior researcher made the final arbitration.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="sec11">
<label>2.2</label>
<title>Meta-analysis method</title>
<sec id="sec12">
<label>2.2.1</label>
<title>Data extraction</title>
<p>Data extraction was preliminarily conducted using an Excel worksheet, including the first author&#x2019;s surname, year, study design, sample size of the included studies, education level, majors, course name, course type, and outcome measures.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec13">
<label>2.2.2</label>
<title>Statistical analysis</title>
<p>Meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.4 and Stata 17.0 software. Since different studies may use different rating systems for continuous variables such as KES and PS, we have chosen the Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) as the measure of effect. The SMD eliminates the impact of different rating scales by dividing the mean difference by the pooled standard deviation. For categorical variables such as LC and TS, we used the Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% CI for the combined analysis. A <italic>p</italic>-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>). We conducted heterogeneity tests on the included studies. If there was no significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;50%, <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x2265;&#x202F;0.05), we used the fixed-effects model for the meta-analysis; if there was significant heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;&#x2265;&#x202F;50%, <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.05), we used the random-effects model (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec14">
<label>2.2.3</label>
<title>Test for publication bias</title>
<p>A funnel plot was used to detect publication bias in the study results. A symmetrical distribution of the indicators in the funnel plot suggests the absence of publication bias.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="sec15">
<label>2.2.4</label>
<title>Sensitivity analysis</title>
<p>We used the leave-one-out approach to conduct sensitivity analyses for the primary outcomes. The direction and magnitude of the pooled estimate did not change significantly when any particular study was removed, indicating that the meta-analysis&#x2019;s results are relatively stable.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="results" id="sec16">
<label>3</label>
<title>Results</title>
<sec id="sec17">
<label>3.1</label>
<title>Search results</title>
<p>After screening, our review included 4 RCTs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23 ref24 ref25 ref26">23&#x2013;26</xref>) and 7 CSs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27 ref28 ref29 ref30 ref31 ref32 ref33">27&#x2013;33</xref>). Initially, the search identified 27,393 studies. The titles of the initially retrieved studies were imported into NoteExpress, and 1,875 duplicate studies were removed. Then, by screening titles and abstracts, 1844 studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded, leaving 31 studies. Full-text review of the 31 studies led to the exclusion of 20 studies for the following reasons: review articles (<italic>n</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;3), case reports (<italic>n</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;4), lack of primary outcomes (<italic>n</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;3), insufficient data (<italic>n</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;6), and lack of a control group (<italic>n</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;4) (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig1">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption>
<p>Flowchart of the search strategy.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g001.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec18">
<label>3.2</label>
<title>Characteristics of included studies</title>
<p>The included studies comprised 1 theoretical course trial (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">31</xref>) and 10 practical course trials (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23 ref24 ref25 ref26 ref27 ref28 ref29 ref30">23&#x2013;30</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">33</xref>). 9 studies were related to graduates (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23 ref24 ref25 ref26 ref27">23&#x2013;27</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31 ref32 ref33">31&#x2013;33</xref>), and 2 studies were related to three-year colleges (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>). 3 studies were related to clinical majors (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>), and 8 studies were related to nursing majors (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26 ref27 ref28 ref29 ref30 ref31">26&#x2013;31</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">33</xref>). The included studies covered 4 studies on critical care medicine knowledge (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>), 3 studies on neurosurgery (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>), 2 studies on fundamentals of nursing (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">31</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">33</xref>), 1 study on operating room (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>), and 1 study on obstetrics (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>). The characteristics of the included studies are presented in <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab2">Table 2</xref>.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab2">
<label>Table 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Main characteristics of the included studies in the current meta-analysis.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">References</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Study design</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Sample size (cognitive learning theory)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Sample size (LBL)</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">Population</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">Majors</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">Course name</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">Course type</th>
<th align="left" valign="top">Outcome measures</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">RoB2</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Yu HT et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">RCT</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">35</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Clinical Expertise</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Critical Care Medicine</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS,TS,LC</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Ye D et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">RCT</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">34</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">34</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Surgery(neurosurgery)</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS,TS,LC</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Zhang YJ et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">RCT</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">30</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">30</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Clinical Expertise</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Critical Care Medicine</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS,TS,LC</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Li SY et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">65</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Operating room</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS,LC</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Yang ZF et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">54</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">54</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">three year college</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Obstetrics</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,TS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Wang DM et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">28</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">27</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Surgery (neurosurgery)</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS,TS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Wang C et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">RCT</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">21</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">21</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Critical Care Medicine</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Wang Y et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">52</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">60</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">three year college</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Surgery(neurosurgery)</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS,TS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Miner A et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">31</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">37</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">31</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Fundamentals of Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Theory</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,TS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Bashir K et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">19</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Clinical Expertise</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Critical Care Medicine</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES,PS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Yuliawan D et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">33</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">CS</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">39</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">39</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Graduates</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Fundamentals of Nursing</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice</td>
<td align="left" valign="middle">KES</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">B</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>CS, Cohort study; RCT, randomized controlled trial; LBL, lecture-based learning; KES, knowledge examination score; PS, practice score; LC, learning compliance; TS, teaching satisfaction.</p>
<p>RoB 1.0 B indicates a moderate risk of bias in the study.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec19">
<label>3.3</label>
<title>Risk of bias in included studies</title>
<p>Among the 4 randomized controlled trials (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23 ref24 ref25 ref26">23&#x2013;26</xref>), 1 study (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref25">25</xref>) had a moderate risk of bias for Deviations from intended interventions and Measurement of the outcome. Still, the overall bias was low. Two studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">23</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>), the outcome measurement was moderate risk, while the overall bias was low. One study (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>) had a high-risk Randomization process, but the overall bias was low. Another study (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref24">24</xref>) had a high-risk Randomization process and a moderate-risk outcome measurement, with the overall bias being low-risk. See <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>.</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig2">
<label>Figure 2</label>
<caption>
<p>Resultsofriskbiasassessment.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g002.tif"/>
</fig>
<p>Among the seven non-randomized controlled trials (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27 ref28 ref29 ref30 ref31 ref32 ref33">27&#x2013;33</xref>), two studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>) had a moderate risk of bias for intervention classification and data missingness, with an overall moderate risk of bias. The remaining four studies had a low overall risk of bias. See <xref ref-type="table" rid="tab3">Table 3</xref>.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab3">
<label>Table 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Results of bias risk assessment of non-randomized controlled trials.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top">References</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2460;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2461;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2462;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2463;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2464;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2465;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2466;</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">&#x2467;</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Bashir K et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Li SY et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27">27</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moderate</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moderate</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moderate</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Miner A et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">31</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Wang Y et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Yang ZF et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref28">28</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moderate</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moderate</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Moderate</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="top">Yuliawan D et al. (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref33">33</xref>)</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
<td align="center" valign="top">Low</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<p>&#x2460; Confounding bias; &#x2461; Selection bias of participants; &#x2462; Classification bias of interventions; &#x2463; Deviation bias from intended interventions; &#x2464; Bias due to missing data; &#x2465; Bias in measurement of outcomes; &#x2466; Selective reporting bias; &#x2467; Overall bias.</p>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec20">
<label>3.4</label>
<title>Results of meta-analysis</title>
<sec id="sec21">
<label>3.4.1</label>
<title>A meta-analysis of knowledge examination score</title>
<p>All studies reported the effectiveness of Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction on KES. The pooled results (SMD 1.55, 95% CI: 0.81 to 2.29; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001) showed that the KES of the intervention group was significantly higher than that of the LBL teaching method. Due to the high heterogeneity (<italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001, I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;95%&#x202F;&#x003E;&#x202F;50%), a random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig3">
<label>Figure 3</label>
<caption>
<p>Forest plot of KES for cognitive learning theory compared with LBL.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g003.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec22">
<label>3.4.2</label>
<title>A meta-analysis of practice score</title>
<p>Among the 11 studies, 8 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23 ref24 ref25 ref26 ref27">23&#x2013;27</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref29">29</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref30">30</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref32">32</xref>) provided PS data before and after the intervention, which was included in the meta-analysis. The pooled effect size of these studies (SMD 1.83, 95% CI: 1.19 to 2.47; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001) showed that the PS of the intervention group was significantly higher than that of the LBL teaching method. Due to significant statistical heterogeneity between the studies (<italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001, I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;90%&#x202F;&#x003E;&#x202F;50%), a random-effects model was used for the meta-analysis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig4">
<label>Figure 4</label>
<caption>
<p>Forest plot of PS for cognitive learning theory compared with LBL.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g004.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec23">
<label>3.4.3</label>
<title>Meta-analysis of learning compliance</title>
<p>Four studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref26">26</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>) reported the effectiveness of Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction teaching strategy on LC. Compared to LBL, the intervention group showed significantly higher LC (OR&#x202F;=&#x202F;4.92, 95% CI: 3.13&#x2013;7.73; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.0001). A fixed-effects model was adopted for the meta-analysis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig5">Figure 5</xref>) due to the absence of heterogeneity (<italic>p</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;0.28, I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;20%).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig5">
<label>Figure 5</label>
<caption>
<p>Forest plot of LC for cognitive learning theory compared with LBL.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g005.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec24">
<label>3.4.4</label>
<title>A meta-analysis of teaching satisfaction</title>
<p>In this study, 8 studies (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref19">19</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">21</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">22</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref27 ref28 ref29">27&#x2013;29</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref31">31</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref34">34</xref>) provided data on TS before and after the intervention, which were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to LBL teaching (OR&#x202F;=&#x202F;7.86, 95% CI: 3.22&#x2013;19.20; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.0001), the LC under the Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction teaching strategy was significantly higher. A fixed-effects model was employed for the meta-analysis (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig6">Figure 6</xref>) due to the absence of heterogeneity (<italic>p</italic>&#x202F;=&#x202F;0.85, I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;0%).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig6">
<label>Figure 6</label>
<caption>
<p>Forest plot of TS for cognitive learning theory compared with LBL.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g006.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec25">
<label>3.4.5</label>
<title>Subgroup analysis</title>
<p>Given the high heterogeneity observed in KES and PS studies, this may be related to five factors: study design, training levels, course type, course contents, and majors. We conducted subgroup analyses of the relevant literature to investigate whether these factors influenced heterogeneity in KES and PS.</p>
<p>The results showed that in the study design subgroup analysis for KES (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab4">Table 4</xref>), the heterogeneity in the RCT group was eliminated (I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;0%), while heterogeneity in the CS group remained substantial (I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;95%). No significant improvement in heterogeneity was observed in other subgroups. For PS subgroup analyses (<xref ref-type="table" rid="tab5">Table 5</xref>), no subgroup demonstrated significant heterogeneity reduction. The forest plots for subgroup analyses are provided in <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM3">Supplementary Figure S3</xref>.</p>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab4">
<label>Table 4</label>
<caption>
<p>Subgroup analyses of KES in this meta-analysis.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="2">Study characteristics</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Participants</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Test for heterogeneity</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Test for effect</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Subgroup</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">Studies</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">cognitive learning theory</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">LBL</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">I<sup>2</sup> (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Chi<sup>2</sup> test</th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><italic>p</italic>-value</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">(SMD [CI])</th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><italic>p</italic>-value</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Statistics, <italic>p</italic>-value</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">1. Study design</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Randomized controlled trial (RCT)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">120</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">120</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.88</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.60</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0.43 [0.17,0.68]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">9.15, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.002</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Cohort study (CS)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">294</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">291</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">97</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">173.48</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.20 [1.08,3.32]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.0001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">414</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">411</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">212.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.55 [0.81,2.29]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.0001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">2. Training levels</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Undergraduates</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">9</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">308</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">297</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">93</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">108.61</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.23 [0.56, 1.89]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.0003</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0.74, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.39</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Three year college</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">106</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">114</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">99</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">82.32</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.00 [0.96, 6.97]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.14</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">414</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">411</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">212.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.55 [0.81, 2.29]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.0001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">3. Course type</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Theory course</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">37</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">31</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.93 [2.23, 3.63]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">8.50, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.004</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Practice course</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">10</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">377</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">380</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">183.60</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.41 [0.66, 2.16]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.0002</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">414</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">411</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">212.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.55 [0.81, 2.29]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.004</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">4. Course contents</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Critical Care Medicine</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">105</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">105</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">80</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">15.05</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.002</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0.92 [0.25, 1.58]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.007</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">139.75, <italic>p</italic> &#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Surgery (neurosurgery)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">114</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">121</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">91</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">22.83</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.07 [0.09,2.05]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.03</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Fundamentals of Nursing</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">76</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">70</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">71</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3.44</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.006</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.48 [1.65,3.31]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Operating Room</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">65</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0.11 [&#x2212;0.24,0.46]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.55</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Obstetrics</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">54</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">54</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5.04 [4.26, 5.82]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">414</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">411</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">212.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.55 [0.81, 2.29]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.0001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">5. Majors</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">330</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">327</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">96</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">194.07</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.73 [0.75, 2.71]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.0005</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.01, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.31</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Clinical expertise</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">84</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">84</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">87</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">14.87</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.0006</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.04 [0.11, 1.96]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.03</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">11</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">414</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">411</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">212.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.55 [0.81, 2.29]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.31</td>
<td/>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
<table-wrap position="float" id="tab5">
<label>Table 5</label>
<caption>
<p>Subgroup analyses of PS in this meta-analysis.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides" rules="groups">
<thead>
<tr>
<th align="left" valign="top" rowspan="2">Study characteristics</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Participants</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="3">Test for heterogeneity</th>
<th align="center" valign="top" colspan="2">Test for effect</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Subgroup</th>
</tr>
<tr>
<th align="center" valign="top">Studies</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">cognitive learning theory</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">LBL</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">I<sup>2</sup> (%)</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Chi<sup>2</sup> test</th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><italic>p</italic>-value</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">(SMD [CI])</th>
<th align="center" valign="top"><italic>p</italic>-value</th>
<th align="center" valign="top">Statistics, <italic>p</italic>-value</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">1. Study design</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Randomized controlled trial (RCT)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">120</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">120</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">92</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">36.13</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.39 [0.37,2.41]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.008</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0.85, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.36</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Cohort study (CS)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">164</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">167</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">84</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">18.57</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.0003</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.97 [1.27,2.66]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">284</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">287</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">89</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.68 [1.09,2.27]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">2. Training levels</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Undergraduates</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">7</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">232</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">227</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">90</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">57.78</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.78 [1.08,2.48]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">2.68, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Three year college</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">52</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">60</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.11 [0.71,1.51]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">284</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">287</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">89</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.68 [1.09,2.27]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">3. Course contents</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Critical care medicine</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">4</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">105</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">105</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">94</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">48.97</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.80 [0.43,3.16]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.01</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.44, <italic>p</italic> =&#x202F;0.49</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Surgery (neurosurgery)</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">114</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">121</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">72</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">7.15</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.03</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.49 [0.92,2.07]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Operating room</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">65</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61</td>
<td/>
<td/>
<td/>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.93 [1.50, 2.35]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">284</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">287</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">89</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.68 [1.09,2.27]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle" colspan="10">4. Majors</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Nursing</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">5</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">200</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">203</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">75</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">16.25</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">=0.03</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.75 [1.26, 2.23]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">0.04, P&#x202F;=&#x202F;0.85</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Clinical expertise</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">3</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">84</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">84</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">39.95</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.58 [&#x2212;0.08, 3.23]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="left" valign="middle">Total</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">8</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">284</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">287</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">89</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">61.82</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">1.68 [1.09, 2.27]</td>
<td align="center" valign="middle">&#x003C;0.00001</td>
<td/>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="sec26">
<label>3.4.6</label>
<title>Publication bias</title>
<p>Due to the inclusion of fewer than 10 studies reporting data on PS, LC, and TS, funnel plots could not be generated to assess publication bias for these outcomes. Therefore, publication bias analysis was only performed for KES using a funnel plot. The study revealed that the funnel plot exhibited near-symmetry, indicating negligible evidence of significant publication bias (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig7">Figure 7</xref>).</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig7">
<label>Figure 7</label>
<caption>
<p>Publication bias of KES.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g007.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="sec27">
<label>3.4.7</label>
<title>Sensitivity analysis</title>
<p>A sensitivity analysis was performed for KES using the leave-one-out method (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig8">Figure 8</xref>). Upon exclusion of any individual study, the direction and magnitude of the pooled estimates remained consistent without significant changes, indicating the robustness of the meta-analysis results.</p>
<fig position="float" id="fig8">
<label>Figure 8</label>
<caption>
<p>Sensitive analysis of KES.</p>
</caption>
<graphic xlink:href="fmed-12-1522830-g008.tif"/>
</fig>
</sec>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="discussion" id="sec28">
<label>4</label>
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>Contemporary health professions education faces numerous challenges, requiring learners not only to master clinical expertise and skills but also to develop capabilities to adapt to medical advancements and innovations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref35">35</xref>). Traditional health professions education predominantly adopts an &#x201C;educator-led, learner-passive&#x201D; model (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref36">36</xref>), which neglects learners&#x2019; central role and self-directed learning abilities, often resulting in learners&#x2019; failure to apply theoretical knowledge in clinical practice and a significant disconnect between theory and application. Although Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction has demonstrated positive educational outcomes in higher education systems (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref37">37</xref>), its implementation in health professions education remains nascent. Primarily, health professions education emphasizes the transmission of foundational knowledge and technical skills while insufficiently fostering learners&#x2019; autonomous learning and innovative capacities, leading educators to prefer conventional lecturing methods when selecting pedagogical strategies. Secondly, open and interactive teaching approaches demand educators&#x2019; professional competence and advanced classroom management skills, requiring substantial teaching resources to guide and regulate learners&#x2019; progress in open-learning environments effectively. Finally, significant disparities exist in medical curricula standards and educational levels across different regions. Consequently, enhancing the quality of medical talent cultivation and improving the effectiveness of health professions education constitutes a critical challenge in contemporary health professions education.</p>
<p>The meta-analysis results demonstrated that compared to the LBL group, Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction group exhibited significantly higher scores in KES, PS, LC, and TS, indicating that this instructional approach enables learners to transform acquired theoretical knowledge and practical skills into procedural knowledge of intellectual skills and cognitive strategies applicable in clinical practice. Furthermore, by systematically dividing the learning process into nine stages&#x2014;Gain Attention, Inform Learners of Objectives, Stimulate Recall of Prior Learning, Present Stimulus, Provide Learner Guidance, Elicit Performance, Provide Feedback, Assess Performance, and Enhance Retention and Transfer&#x2014;the Gagn&#x00E9; framework achieves a &#x201C;spiral learning progression&#x201D; through iterative guidance, evaluation, and re-evaluation, thereby assisting educators in innovating pedagogical concepts and dynamically adjusting instructional pacing (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref38">38</xref>). Additionally, given the extensive knowledge domains in health professions education, the LBL method fails to encourage learners to explore their attention, learning, memory, and cognition processes. The meta-analysis revealed that learners in Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction group demonstrated superior knowledge mastery and enhanced self-directed learning capabilities compared to their LBL counterparts.</p>
<p>The combined effect sizes of KES (SMD 1.55, 95% CI: 0.81&#x2013;2.29; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001), PS (SMD 1.83, 95% CI: 1.19&#x2013;2.47; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.00001), LC (OR 4.92, 95% CI: 3.13&#x2013;7.73; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.0001), and TS (OR 7.86, 95% CI: 3.22&#x2013;19.20; <italic>p</italic>&#x202F;&#x003C;&#x202F;0.0001) demonstrate that Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction is significantly more effective than traditional LBL pedagogy. This effectiveness likely stems from Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s framework, stimulating learning through external cues, fostering learners&#x2019; anticipation for new knowledge and skills, and generating intrinsic motivation (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref39">39</xref>). The approach proactively mobilizes learners&#x2019; self-directed learning initiatives and subjective agency, enabling them to derive intellectual enjoyment from theoretical studies and enhance educational outcomes. Additionally, within conventional teaching environments, learners&#x2019; curiosity about this novel instructional model intensifies their learning motivation and engagement, contributing to superior KES and TS achievements. By shifting the paradigm from educator-centered &#x201C;teaching&#x201D; to learner-centered &#x201C;learning,&#x201D; Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s framework positions learners as active constructors of knowledge and meaning (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref40">40</xref>). Educators in this model transition from passive knowledge dissemination to prioritizing the stimulation of learning interests, encouraging learners to explore their cognitive processes of attention, knowledge acquisition, memory retention, and critical thinking. Consequently, the intervention group&#x2019;s pedagogical superiority over traditional LBL methods becomes markedly evident.</p>
<p>When analyzing the KES and PS outcome measures, significant heterogeneity was observed among the included studies. To explore this phenomenon, the outcome measures of KES and PS were stratified into five subgroups: Study design, Training levels, Course type, Course contents, and Majors. Subgroup analysis of the Study design for KES revealed no heterogeneity in the RCT group (I<sup>2</sup>&#x202F;=&#x202F;0%), suggesting that heterogeneity in KES may be associated with the Study design. However, significant heterogeneity persisted in KES across subgroups of Study design, Training levels, Course type, and Majors, indicating the minimal influence of these factors on KES heterogeneity.</p>
<p>For PS, subgroup analyses of Training levels, Study design, Course type, Course contents, and Majors also demonstrated persistent heterogeneity, highlighting complex variability across these dimensions. Consequently, future studies should investigate additional potential sources of heterogeneity. Significant heterogeneity in KES and PS remained unresolved after subgroup analyses. Possible explanations include variations in educational proficiency, curriculum structure, assessment difficulty, and learners&#x2019; academic capabilities. The intricate interactions among these factors may contribute to outcome variability, underscoring the necessity to rigorously account for these influences in future research designs to enhance consistency and reliability.</p>
<p>In recent years, Gagn&#x00E9;&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction has been extensively trialed in higher education and demonstrated efficacy in enhancing health professions education outcomes (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref41">41</xref>). This instructional strategy employs a nine-phase framework to design learning activities, which helps educators deconstruct and analyze instructional processes to improve learners&#x2019; academic achievements in health professions education and supports the establishment of innovative curriculum development concepts. It promotes course innovation, achieves outcome-oriented curriculum construction goals, and fosters the formation of multi-format, diversified instructional models.</p>
<p>However, this systematic review and meta-analysis have several limitations: &#x2460; The included studies generally exhibited relatively low quality and small sample sizes, necessitating the inclusion and publication of more large-scale, multi-center, high-quality research. &#x2461; Significant heterogeneity in KES and PS may be attributed to factors such as variations in course types, educator proficiency, instructional design, assessment content, and learners&#x2019; academic capabilities. &#x2462; Methodological constraints inherent to educational interventions&#x2014;specifically, the inability to implement allocation concealment or blinding for participants and instructors&#x2014;may have introduced selection and information biases. &#x2463; Heterogeneity in outcome evaluation metrics across studies limited the analysis of additional shared indicators. &#x2464; While standardization challenges across rating systems were mitigated through SMD calculations, incomplete reporting of standard deviations or scoring details in some studies may compromise effect size precision. Future research should adopt standardized rating systems and publicly share raw data to facilitate robust cross-study comparisons.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="conclusions" id="sec29">
<label>5</label>
<title>Conclusion</title>
<p>This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that, compared to LBL, Gagne&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction exhibits significant advantages in health professions education. The method effectively enhances learners&#x2019; KES, PS, LC, and TS, with these benefits likely stemming from its systematic design that strengthens cognitive processes and stimulates learning motivation. Despite existing study heterogeneity (e.g., variations in course types and evaluation criteria) and limitations in research quality (such as small sample sizes and methodological biases), the results still support the application value of Gagne&#x2019;s 9 Events of Instruction in health professions education. Future research should prioritize high-quality, multicenter randomized controlled trials to further validate its long-term efficacy and optimize instructional design, addressing challenges in integrating theory and practice within medical education.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec sec-type="data-availability" id="sec30">
<title>Data availability statement</title>
<p>The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SM1">Supplementary material</xref>, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="author-contributions" id="sec31">
<title>Author contributions</title>
<p>YL: Data curation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing &#x2013; original draft, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing. ZL: Data curation, Writing &#x2013; original draft. ZYL: Validation, Writing &#x2013; original draft. YY: Software, Writing &#x2013; original draft. QY: Writing &#x2013; original draft. XL: Supervision, Writing &#x2013; review &#x0026; editing.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="funding-information" id="sec32">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. Yunnan Provincial Graduate High-quality Curriculum Project in 2022, No.: Cloud Degree [2022] No. 8.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="COI-statement" id="sec33">
<title>Conflict of interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="ai-statement" id="sec34">
<title>Generative AI statement</title>
<p>The authors declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="disclaimer" id="sec35">
<title>Publisher&#x2019;s note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
<sec sec-type="supplementary-material" id="sec36">
<title>Supplementary material</title>
<p>The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: <ext-link xlink:href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2025.1522830/full#supplementary-material" ext-link-type="uri">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2025.1522830/full#supplementary-material</ext-link></p>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Table_1.docx" id="SM1" mimetype="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Table_2.docx" id="SM2" mimetype="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Data_Sheet_3.docx" id="SM3" mimetype="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Data_Sheet_4.xlsx" id="SM4" mimetype="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"/>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="ref1"><label>1.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>McSparron</surname> <given-names>JI</given-names></name> <name><surname>Vanka</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>CC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Cognitive learning theory for clinical teaching</article-title>. <source>Clin Teach</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>16</volume>:<fpage>96</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>100</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/tct.12781</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref2"><label>2.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lo</surname> <given-names>WL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hsieh</surname> <given-names>MC</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Teaching communication skills: using Gagne's model as an illustration</article-title>. <source>Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>32</volume>:<fpage>19</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>25</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4103/tcmj.tcmj_59_19</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32110515</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref3"><label>3.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>JJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Johannesmeyer</surname> <given-names>HJ</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Gagn&#x00E9;'s 9 Events of Instruction with active learning: teaching student pharmacists how to measure blood pressure</article-title>. <source>J Pharm Pract</source>. (<year>2021</year>) <volume>34</volume>:<fpage>407</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>16</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0897190019875610</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31526081</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref4"><label>4.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Belfield</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Using Gagne's theory to teach chest X-ray interpretation</article-title>. <source>Clin Teach</source>. (<year>2010</year>) <volume>7</volume>:<fpage>5</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>8</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1743-498X.2009.00329.x</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21134135</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref5"><label>5.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tambi</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bayoumi</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lansberg</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Banerjee</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Blending Gagne's instructional model with Peyton's approach to design an introductory bioinformatics lesson plan for medical students: proof-of-concept study</article-title>. <source>JMIR Med Educ</source>. (<year>2018</year>) <volume>4</volume>:<fpage>e11122</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2196/11122</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">30361192</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref6"><label>6.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gao</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>Q</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The application of &#x2018;nursing skills&#x2019; APP based on Gagne&#x2019;s learning theory in the teaching of basic nursing skills</article-title>. <source>Chin Nurs Res</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>33</volume>:<fpage>1408</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>10</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.12102/j.issn.109-6493.2019.08.032</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref7"><label>7.</label><citation citation-type="other"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>Q</given-names></name></person-group>. Application of Gagne's information processing theory in high school music appreciation teaching [D]. Hainan Normal University (<year>2023</year>). doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.27719/d.cnki.ghnsf.2023.000522</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref8"><label>8.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Arja</surname> <given-names>SB</given-names></name> <name><surname>Arja</surname> <given-names>SB</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fatteh</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The hybrid model of clinical skills teaching and the learning theories behind it</article-title>. <source>J Adv Med Educ Prof</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>7</volume>:<fpage>111</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.30476/JAMP.2019.74838</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31528644</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref9"><label>9.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tharani</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lalani</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mughal</surname> <given-names>FB</given-names></name> <name><surname>Momin</surname> <given-names>RB</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Developing mental health competency in undergraduate nursing students amid pandemic: a hybrid model approach</article-title>. <source>Teach Learn Nurs</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>17</volume>:<fpage>277</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>81</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.teln.2022.03.007</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">35528609</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref10"><label>10.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Vasilenok</surname> <given-names>AV</given-names></name> <name><surname>Buyanova</surname> <given-names>NM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Maryasheva</surname> <given-names>SV</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The comparative analysis of professional standards of specialists with higher and secondary medical professional education</article-title>. <source>Probl Sotsialnoi Gig Zdravookhranenniiai Istor Med</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>30</volume>:<fpage>1345</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>50</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.32687/0869-866X-2022-30-6-1345-1350</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">36541320</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref11"><label>11.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Shi</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xue</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hang</surname> <given-names>O</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Evaluation of the implementation effect of clinical medical case combined with PBL teaching method</article-title>. <source>Continuing Med Educ</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>37</volume>:<fpage>57</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>60</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1004-6763.2023.09.015</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref12"><label>12.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wen</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name> <name><surname>Jiang</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zeng</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. <article-title>Application of the BOPPPS-CBL model in electrocardiogram teaching for nursing students: a randomized comparison</article-title>. <source>BMC Med Educ</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>23</volume>:<fpage>987</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s12909-023-04983-x</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref13"><label>13.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gong</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hou</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>.<article-title>The application of SPOC combined with ' five-step ' teaching method in the literature seminar course of nursing postgraduates</article-title>. <source>Chin Nurs Res</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>37</volume>:<fpage>3382</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2023.18.027</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref14"><label>14.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ai</surname> <given-names>G</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Huang</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhu</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Taking the teaching of urology as an example, this paper discusses the undergraduate education of clinical medicine</article-title>. <source>Continuing Med Educ</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>37</volume>:<fpage>161</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1004-6763.2023.08.041</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref15"><label>15.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yuan</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Han</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hu</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Deng</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Tang</surname> <given-names>F</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The application of TSDF teaching mode and quality control system in clinical teaching of dental pulp</article-title>. <source>China Continuing Med Educ</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>15</volume>:<fpage>15</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>9</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1674-9308.2023.04.004</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref16"><label>16.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hu</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>SPOC blended learning practice of compiler principles course based on cognitive learning theory</article-title>. <source>J Neijiang Normal Univ</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>38</volume>:<fpage>106</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>12</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.13603/j.cnki.51-1621/z.2023.02.017</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref17"><label>17.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Page</surname> <given-names>MJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>McKenzie</surname> <given-names>JE</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bossuyt</surname> <given-names>PM</given-names></name> <name><surname>Boutron</surname> <given-names>I</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hoffmann</surname> <given-names>TC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mulrow</surname> <given-names>CD</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. <article-title>The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews</article-title>. <source>BMJ</source>. (<year>2021</year>) <volume>372</volume>:<fpage>n71</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/bmj.n71</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33782057</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref18"><label>18.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cumpston</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>T</given-names></name> <name><surname>Page</surname> <given-names>MJ</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chandler</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Welch</surname> <given-names>VA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Higgins</surname> <given-names>JP</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. <article-title>Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions</article-title>. <source>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</source>. (<year>2019</year>) <volume>10</volume>:<fpage>ED000142</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1002/14651858.ED000142</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">31643080</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref19"><label>19.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Higgins</surname> <given-names>JPT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Altman</surname> <given-names>DG</given-names></name> <name><surname>Gotzsche</surname> <given-names>PC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Juni</surname> <given-names>P</given-names></name> <name><surname>Moher</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Oxman</surname> <given-names>AD</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. <article-title>The Cochrane Collaboration&#x2019;s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials</article-title>. <source>BMJ</source>. (<year>2011</year>) <volume>343</volume>:<fpage>d5928</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>8</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/bmj.d5928</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22008217</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref20"><label>20.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Sterne</surname> <given-names>JA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hern&#x00E1;n</surname> <given-names>MA</given-names></name> <name><surname>Reeves</surname> <given-names>BC</given-names></name> <name><surname>Savovi&#x0107;</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Berkman</surname> <given-names>ND</given-names></name> <name><surname>Viswanathan</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <etal/></person-group>. <article-title>ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions</article-title>. <source>BMJ</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>355</volume>:<fpage>i4919</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1136/bmj.i4919</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27733354</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref21"><label>21.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xu</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>X</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xiong</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xie</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhao</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Assessing the effectiveness of problem-based learning in physical diagnostics education in China: a meta-analysis</article-title>. <source>Sci Rep</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>6</volume>:<fpage>36279</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1038/srep36279</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27808158</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref22"><label>22.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Alenzi</surname> <given-names>EO</given-names></name> <name><surname>Kelley</surname> <given-names>GA</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The association of hyperglycemia and diabetes mellitus and the risk of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia among cancer patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis</article-title>. <source>J Diabetes Complicat</source>. (<year>2017</year>) <volume>31</volume>:<fpage>267</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>72</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2016.09.006</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27751709</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref23"><label>23.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yu</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cao</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Study on the application of Gagne's teaching theory in the teaching of internal jugular vein catheterization</article-title>. <source>J Qiqihar Med Coll</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>44</volume>:<fpage>1382</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>5</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1002-1256.2023.14.018</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref24"><label>24.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Ye</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yu</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wan</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Application of CBL teaching method combined with Gagne's teaching theory in neurosurgery nursing teaching and its clinical significance</article-title>. <source>Chin Med Innovations</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>17</volume>:<fpage>89</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>92</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1674-4985.2020.01.023</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref25"><label>25.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Cao</surname> <given-names>B</given-names></name> <name><surname>Liu</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yu</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Research on the application of Gagne's teaching theory in the teaching of femoral vein puncture catheterization</article-title>. <source>China Health Ind</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>20</volume>:<fpage>186</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>189,193</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.16659/j.cnki.1672-5654.2023.11.186</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref26"><label>26.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhao</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Fan</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The application of Gagne's teaching theory combined with scene teaching in the practice teaching of nursing students in respiratory and critical care medicine</article-title>. <source>Chin J Med Educ Res</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>22</volume>:<fpage>1268</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>72</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3760/cma.j.cn116021-20211121-01400</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref27"><label>27.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Li</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Guo</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Ma</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The effect of CBL model combined with Gagne's teaching theory on the subjective initiative and examination scores of nursing students in the operating room</article-title>. <source>Henan Med Res</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>31</volume>:<fpage>1494</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1004-437X.2022.08.038</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref28"><label>28.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lu</surname> <given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The effect of teaching mode based on Gagne's teaching theory on the cultivation of critical thinking ability of nursing students</article-title>. <source>Chin Nurs Res</source>. (<year>2017</year>) <volume>31</volume>:<fpage>1006</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>9</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1009-6493.2017.08.039</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref29"><label>29.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>R</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Application of Gagne's teaching theory in clinical nursing teaching of neurosurgery</article-title>. <source>Electron J Pract Clin Nurs Sci</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>185</fpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref30"><label>30.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Zhang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name> <name><surname>Shao</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name> <name><surname>Xue</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Application analysis of flipped classroom based on Gagne theory in neurosurgery nursing teaching</article-title>. <source>Chin Sci Technol J Datab Educ Sci</source>. (<year>2023</year>) <volume>6</volume>:<fpage>0013</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref31"><label>31.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Miner</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Mallow</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name> <name><surname>Theeke</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Barnes</surname> <given-names>E</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Using Gagne's 9 Events of Instruction to enhance student performance and course evaluations in undergraduate nursing course</article-title>. <source>Nurse Educ</source>. (<year>2015</year>) <volume>40</volume>:<fpage>152</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/NNE.0000000000000138</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25628243</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref32"><label>32.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bashir</surname> <given-names>K</given-names></name> <name><surname>Rauf</surname> <given-names>L</given-names></name> <name><surname>Yousuf</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name> <name><surname>Anjum</surname> <given-names>S</given-names></name> <name><surname>Bashir</surname> <given-names>MT</given-names></name> <name><surname>Elmoheen</surname> <given-names>A</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Teaching benign paroxysmal positional Vertigo to emergency medicine residents by using Gagne's nine steps of instructional design</article-title>. <source>Adv Med Educ Pract</source>. (<year>2021</year>) <volume>12</volume>:<fpage>1223</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2147/AMEP.S309001</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34690505</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref33"><label>33.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yuliawan</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Widyandana</surname> <given-names>D</given-names></name> <name><surname>Hidayah</surname> <given-names>NR</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Utilization of nursing education progressive web application (NEPWA) media in an education and health promotion course using Gagne's model of instructional design on nursing students: quantitative research and development study</article-title>. <source>JMIR Nurs</source>. (<year>2020</year>) <volume>3</volume>:<fpage>e19780</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.2196/19780</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">34345790</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref34"><label>34.</label><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab id="coll1">World Federation for Medical Education (WFME)</collab></person-group>. <source>Global standards for quality improvement in medical education</source>. <publisher-loc>Brussels</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>WFME</publisher-name> (<year>2021</year>).</citation></ref>
<ref id="ref35"><label>35.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Patel</surname> <given-names>M</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Changes to postgraduate medical education in the 21st century</article-title>. <source>Clin Med (Lond)</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>16</volume>:<fpage>311</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.7861/clinmedicine.16-4-311</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27481371</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref36"><label>36.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lam</surname> <given-names>TP</given-names></name> <name><surname>Lam</surname> <given-names>YY</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Medical education reform: the Asian experience</article-title>. <source>Acad Med</source>. (<year>2009</year>) <volume>84</volume>:<fpage>1313</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b18189</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19707080</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref37"><label>37.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>J</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The application of Gagne's information processing theory in high school geography teaching &#x2013; taking &#x2018;the material cycle of lithosphere&#x2019; as an example</article-title>. <source>J Seeking Knowl Guide</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>71</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>3</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.14161/j.cnki.qzdk.2022.09.009</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref38"><label>38.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Condell</surname> <given-names>SL</given-names></name> <name><surname>Elliott</surname> <given-names>N</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Gagn&#x00E9;'s theory of instruction--its relevance to nurse education</article-title>. <source>Nurse Educ Today</source>. (<year>1989</year>) <volume>9</volume>:<fpage>281</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>4</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0260-6917(89)90082-8</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref39"><label>39.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Buscombe</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>Using Gagne's theory to teach procedural skills</article-title>. <source>Clin Teach</source>. (<year>2013</year>) <volume>10</volume>:<fpage>302</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>7</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/tct.12051</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24015735</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref40"><label>40.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Huang</surname> <given-names>Y</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The application of Gagne's information processing theory in teaching-based on the research of middle school Chinese reading teaching process</article-title>. <source>Surv Education</source>. (<year>2016</year>) <volume>5</volume>:<fpage>41</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2</lpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.16070/j.cnki.cn45-1388/g4zx.2016.09.016</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref41"><label>41.</label><citation citation-type="journal"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cao</surname> <given-names>C</given-names></name> <name><surname>Sheng</surname> <given-names>Z</given-names></name> <name><surname>Wu</surname> <given-names>H</given-names></name></person-group>. <article-title>The application of teaching method based on Gagne theory in the teaching of nursing students in general surgery department</article-title>. <source>China Higher Med Educ</source>. (<year>2022</year>) <volume>3</volume>:<fpage>134+136</fpage>. doi: <pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3969/j.issn.1002-1701.2022.03.068</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="ref42"><label>42.</label><citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><collab id="coll2">World Health Organization (WHO)</collab></person-group>. <source>Framework for action on integrated people-Centred health services</source>. <publisher-loc>Geneva</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>WHO</publisher-name> (<year>2010</year>).</citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>