Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Inclusion of Symposium-Based Learning of Rational Drug Use for Medical Undergraduates: Evaluation of its Effectiveness and Feedback Cover

Inclusion of Symposium-Based Learning of Rational Drug Use for Medical Undergraduates: Evaluation of its Effectiveness and Feedback

Open Access
|Jun 2026

Figures & Tables

RDU Awareness: Therapeutic objectives and selection of rational drug (n=150)

Domain / ItemPre-SymposiaPost-Symposia
YES (n, %)NO (n, %)YES (n, %)NO (n, %)
1. Criteria for Selecting a Rational Drug
Safety82 (54.6%)68 (45.4%)145 (96.7%)5 (3.3%)
Tolerability78 (52.0%)72 (48.0%)144 (96.0%)6 (4.0%)
Efficacy85 (56.6%)65 (43.4%)147 (98.0%)3 (2.0%)
Cost70 (46.6%)80 (53.4%)142 (94.6%)8 (5.4%)
All of the Above76 (50.6%)74 (49.4%)146 (97.3%)4 (2.7%)
2. Is Detailed History Needed for RDU?79 (52.6%)71 (47.4%)148 (98.7%)2 (1.3%)
3. Is Therapeutic Objective Necessary?83 (55.3%)67 (44.7%)149 (99.3%)1 (0.7%)
4. Therapeutic Objectives
Treat signs & symptoms77 (51.3%)73 (48.7%)145 (96.7%)5 (3.3%)
Eradicate disease80 (53.3%)70 (46.7%)147 (98.0%)3 (2.0%)
Prevent transmission & complications75 (50.0%)75 (50.0%)148 (98.7%)2 (1.3%)

Demographic Characteristics of Study Participants (n = 150)

VariableCategoryn (%)
Age (years)Mean ± SD21.1 ± 0.6
GenderMale62 (41.3%)
Female88 (58.7%)
Residential StatusHosteller77 (51.3%)
Day Scholar73 (48.7%)
Type of SchoolingState Board82 (54.7%)
CBSE49 (32.7%)
ICSE9 (6.0%)
Others10 (6.6%)
Access to Smartphone / InternetYes150 (100%)
No0 (0%)
Parents in Medical ProfessionYes38 (25.3%)
No112 (74.7%)
Health Worker in the FamilyYes48 (22.9%)
No162 (77.1%)
Chronic Disease in FamilyYes71 (33.8%)
No139 (66.2%)
Pharmacology Practical Attendance (%)High58 (38.6%)
Moderate64 (42.7%)
Low28 (18.7%)
Interest in Pharmacology (Self-rated)High58 (27.6%)
Moderate109 (51.9%)
Low43 (20.5%)
Exposure to Self-medication Practices at HomeYes91 (60.7%)
No59 (39.3%)
Participation in AcademicsHigh68 (45.3%)
Moderate55 (36.7%)
Low27 (18.0%)
Preferred Learning ModeOnline21 (14.0%)
Offline68 (45.3%)
Hybrid61 (40.7%)
Participation in Non-academicsHigh44 (29.3%)
Moderate68 (45.3%)
Low38 (25.4%)
Family Member in Pharmacy / Medical StoreYes29 (19.3%)
No121 (80.7%)
Awareness of Prescription RegulationsYes41 (19.5%)
No169 (80.5%)
Previous Exposure to RDU EducationYes15(6.8%)
No135 (93.4%)
Previous Workshops / CMEs AttendedYes57 (38.0%)
No93 (62.0%)

Assessment of Practice based scores (case-based scenarios): Pre and post symposium

Pre-symposium scorePost-symposium score
Mean ±Standard deviation2.34 ± 0.614.06 ± 0.57
Paired differences
MeanStd deviation (SD)95% CLtDfp-value
UpperLower
Pre-test2.340.611.24 – 1.4326.85149<0.001
Post-test4.060.572.96 – 3.1565.71149<0.001 (***).

Pre- and Post-Symposium Awareness Scores (N = 150)

Outcome VariablePre-Symposia Mean ± SDPost-Symposia Mean ± SDChange (Post–Pre)Improvement (%)
RDU Awareness1.20 ± 0.354.85 ± 0.20+3.65+304%
Correct Information1.10 ± 0.404.90 ± 0.15+3.80+345%
Correct Drug Selection1.30 ± 0.324.90 ± 0.18+3.60+277%
Correct Drug Use1.15 ± 0.384.88 ± 0.17+3.73+324%
Awareness of Pharmaceutical Influence1.00 ± 0.424.95 ± 0.10+3.95+395%
Overall Awareness Score5.75 ± 1.924.45 ± 0.8+18.7+325%

Assessment of students’ attitude towards rational drug use pre and post symposium to the five statements (*)_ (1A–1E)

StatementsStrongly DisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStrongly agree
Pre-symposiumPost-symposiumPre-symposiumPost-symposiumPre-symposiumPost-symposiumPre-symposiumPost-symposiumPre-symposiumPost-symposium
1A000000113 (74.5%)96 (63.3%)37 (24.4%)54 (36%)
1B1 (0.7%)01 (0.7%)1 (0.7%)4 (2.6%)0121 (80%)98 (65%)23 (15%)51 (34%)
1C01 (0.7%)3 (2%)07 (4.6%)0131 (86.4%)94 (62%)9 (6%)55 (36%)
1D1 (0.7%)0004 (2.6%)0125 (82.5%)81 (53.4%)20 (13.2%)69 (46%)
1E2 (1.3%)04 (2.6%)000120 (79%)68(45%)24 (16%)82 (54.%)

Group-wise Awareness Scores Pre- and Post-Symposium (Mean ± SD)

Clincial Posting (Departments)*Pre-Symposia Mean ± SDPost-Symposia Mean ± SDChange (Post–Pre)Improvement (%)
General Medicine (n=30)1.25 ± 0.404.90 ± 0.18+3.65+292%
General Surgery (n=30)1.10 ± 0.454.88 ± 0.20+3.78+343%
Pediatrics (n=30)1.30 ± 0.384.92 ± 0.15+3.62+278%
Obstetrics and Gynecology (n=30)1.05 ± 0.424.85 ± 0.22+3.80+362%
Community Medicine (n=30)1.15 ± 0.364.95 ± 0.12+3.80+330%
Overall (N=150)1.17 ± 0.404.90 ± 0.18+3.73+319%

Feedback of the students about the symposium

StatementsResponses (N=150)

YesNo

1. Were the topics discussed relevant?142 (94%)8 (5%)

2. Did the Programme meet your expectation?145 (96%)5 (3%)

3. Would you recommend such programme to your peers or juniors?143 (94%)7 (5%)

4. Did you find the symposium interesting?142 (94%)8 (5%0

5. Did the program improve your awareness and learning about rational drug use145 (96%)5 (3%)

6. Do you look forward to more such sessions in future144 (95%)6 (4%)

7. Suggested Topics for symposium:
Diabetes mellitus37 (24%)
Tuberculosis26 (17%)
Ethical issues in clinical practice20 (13%)
Antimicrobial resistance15 (10%)
Pharmacovigilance12 (8%)
Cancer treatment9 (6%)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eabr-2026-0001 | Journal eISSN: 2956-2090 | Journal ISSN: 2956-0454
Language: English
Page range: 7 - 18
Submitted on: Dec 11, 2025
Accepted on: Jan 27, 2026
Published on: Jun 1, 2026
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year

© 2026 Pallavi Kulkarni, Sumit Ourasang, Vishal Kulkarni, published by University of Kragujevac, Faculty of Medical Sciences
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.