Medical students experience fluctuations in their motivation, influenced by various factors, including curricular rigor, mental health, and institutional factors. Based on Self-Determination Theory (SDT) and the Four Pillars of Academic Engagement (HPEE), this study, conducted at a private Mexican university, examined motivational variation according to academic year, curricular impact, gender differences, and its relationship with mental health. Methods: A quantitative, cross-sectional, descriptive study was conducted using qualitative tools for contextualization (n = 1326). Mann–Whitney U tests, Kruskal–Wallis tests, logistic regression, and psychological network analysis were performed. Results: Motivation showed cross-sectional variation: high in preclinical years 1 and 2, decreasing in clinical years 3 and 4 (p < 0.001), and rebounding in year 6. The reformed curriculum (elective subjects, student-centered active learning) resulted in greater motivation (OR = 10.68, p < 0.001). Women tended to have slightly higher motivation (p = 0.050), higher grade point averages (p < 0.001), but also greater stress (p < 0.001). Network analysis revealed that intrinsic achievement (centrality = 1.11) and curiosity about knowledge (predictability = 84.5%) are the main drivers, while demotivation was linked to the later years. The qualitative part of the study showed altruism/curiosity as the main motivators; mistreatment/workload (demotivators). Conclusions: Motivation is context-sensitive, peaks in the preclinical stage, and recovers with autonomy but is vulnerable during clinical immersion. Autonomy in course selection, active student-centered pedagogies, and gender-sensitive support foster sustained participation. The centrality of intrinsic factors in the network highlights that achievement motivation and knowledge are general and independent motivators. Qualitative data reveal systemic barriers. Stage-specific interventions, such as mentoring, student support programs, and reporting mistreatment, can be crucial for strengthening resilience and performance. Longitudinal and multi-institutional studies are needed to validate the causality and generalizability of this study.

Innovations have been made to educational strategies in health sciences to increase intrinsic motivation in students which helps generate a significant and active learning in students with the help of methodologies, such as gamification, using escape rooms (ER) and the use of digital tools, such as the Sectra Table. The objective of this study is to determine the correlation of motivation in medical students using the Sectra Table digital tool versus nursing students who implemented escape rooms in anatomy sessions. This study was carried out at the Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara. It is a cross-sectional study using a descriptive analysis technique for comparing samples. With a convenience sample of 72 students from the medicine and nursing program, subjecting medicine students to Sectra Table learning and nursing students to escape rooms determining the level of motivation using the RIMMS questionnaire with an alpha greater than .81 for all constructs having as independent variables, confidence, attention, relevance and satisfaction. We performed a statistical analysis by a two-sample comparison model. Obtaining that “escape room” presented higher levels of motivation and with a p-value of 0.0000 satisfaction presented greater motivation levels. Gamification prepares today’s society and helps them acquire professional skills that prepare them for life.

The impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) over the last decades is reflected in the diffusion of tools for automated learning and the availability of applications. Therefore, there is a need to study the risks and benefits of developing hard skills and critical thinking in health education, where tools such as podcasts have been employed to enhance learning. To determine whether the use of AI improves learning when developing a podcast about a health sciences-related topic, we conducted a cross-sectional analytical study with convenience sampling and a descriptive observational approach. We evaluated 52 health science students from a private university in Mexico using 10 questions related to the podcast topic. The assessment of learning, comparing students who used AI with a control group that performed traditional research, showed no significant differences in their mean grades (p = 0.81). The use of AI did not significantly compromise students' learning. These results were further supported by students' perceptions of their own learning, with most expressing positive opinions. AI may be implemented in health sciences education with positive reception by students.