The only reason I can think of why you can't see the expected result in the calling test is that you entered it on the same step that constitutes the call. Then you won't see the expected result of that step. So you should put it on one of the "real" steps instead.
From your description I doubt whether you have anything to gain by using call to test. The only good reason why you might want to use it is that you have lots of tests that repeat the same instructions in a couple of steps, and that you believe that those steps are likely to change. In your case it sounds like the instructions of the called tests are very simple and probably pretty stable. In that case my advice would be to avoid call to test, since there are several complications with that construction that could make life harder for you in the future.
Parameterization can be very useful if you have several tests where all that differs is the data that you enter and that the application responds with, but where the logic of the test is basically the same. If the logic and the navigation flow is varying, then I would say the tests are basically different, and parameterization might not be relevant.
