Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27076799›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA2016

Flipping one-shot library instruction: using Canvas and Pecha Kucha for peer teaching.

Alexander J Carroll, Nedelina Tchangalova, Eileen G Harrington

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pecha Kucha in medical education: a narrative literature review.Korean journal of medical education · 2025
    Review
  2. Pecha Kucha with Part-Task Training Improves Airway Management in Fresh Frozen Cadavers: A Case-Control Observational Study.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2020
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Pecha Kucha presentations by medical students in Spain.International journal of medical education · 2018
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alexander J Carroll
Nedelina Tchangalova
Eileen G Harrington

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study sought to determine whether a flipped classroom that facilitated peer learning would improve undergraduate health sciences students' abilities to find, evaluate, and use appropriate evidence for research assignments.

methodsStudents completed online modules in a learning management system, with librarians facilitating subsequent student-directed, in-person sessions. Mixed methods assessment was used to evaluate program outcomes.

resultsStudents learned information literacy concepts but did not consistently apply them in research assignments. Faculty interviews revealed strengthened partnerships between librarians and teaching faculty.

conclusionThis pedagogy shows promise for implementing and evaluating a successful flipped information literacy program.

Indexed as

Information LiteracyComputer-Assisted InstructionCurriculumEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, UndergraduateHumansInformation Storage and RetrievalPeer GroupProblem-Based LearningStudents, MedicalDistance/MethodsEducationEducational TechnologyEvidence-Based Practice/EducationGroup ProcessesHumansInformation LiteracyLearningLibrariesMedical/EducationProgram DevelopmentTeaching/Methods

Identifiers

PMID27076799
PMCPMC4816471

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.