Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28178915›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2017

The relationship between the monitored performance of tutors and students at PBL tutorials and the marked hypotheses generated by students in a hybrid curriculum.

Jonas I Addae, Pradeep Sahu, Bidyadhar Sa

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jonas I Addaea Department of Preclinical Sciences , University of the West Indies , St. Augustine , Trinidad & Tobago.
Pradeep Sahub Centre for Medical Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical Sciences , University of the West Indies , St. Augustine , Trinidad & Tobago.
Bidyadhar Sab Centre for Medical Sciences Education, Faculty of Medical Sciences , University of the West Indies , St. Augustine , Trinidad & Tobago.
University of the West Indies · TT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere have been a number of published studies examining the link between the effectiveness of the problem-based learning (PBL) process and students' performance in examinations. In a hybrid PBL/lectures curriculum, the results of such studies are of limited use because of the difficulty in dissociating the knowledge gained at lectures from that gained through PBL-related activities. Hence, the objectives of this study were: (1) to develop an instrument to measure the performance of tutors and students at PBL tutorials, and (2) to explore the contribution of such performances to the marks attained by students from the hypotheses generated at PBL tutorials.

methodsA monitoring instrument for assessing the performances of non-expert tutors and students at tutorials was developed and validated using principal component analysis and reliability analysis. Also, a rubric was formulated to enable a content expert to assign marks to the quality of hypotheses generated.

resultsThe monitoring instrument was found to be valid and reliable. There was a significant correlation between the performance of tutors at tutorials and hypotheses marks. In contrast, there was no significant correlation between the performance of students and hypotheses marks. DISCUSSION: The monitoring instrument is a useful tool for improving the PBL process, especially where the medical programme depends on non-expert PBL tutors. In addition to ensuring good PBL processes, it is important that students achieve the desired output at PBL tutorials by producing hypotheses that help them understand the basic sciences underlying the clinical cases. The latter is achieved by the use of an open-ended rubric by a subject expert to assign marks to the hypotheses, a method that also provides additional motivation to students to develop relevant and detailed hypotheses.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducational MeasurementEducation, MedicalFaculty, MedicalGroup ProcessesHumansProblem-Based LearningReproducibility of ResultsStudents, Medicalexploratory factor analysishypothesis qualityinstrumentmonitoringnon-expert tutorsProblem-based learning

Identifiers

PMID28178915
PMCPMC5328341
OpenAlexW2583009450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.