ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2017
Applying team-based learning of diagnostics for undergraduate students: assessing teaching effectiveness by a randomized controlled trial study.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Team based learning pedagogy enhances the education quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- A meta-analysis of students' readiness assurance test performance with team-based learning.BMC medical education · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Impact of an integrated interdisciplinary team-based learning session of medicine and health sector programs at Galala University.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Does medical students' perception of team-based learning have an impact on achieving planned learning outcomes?BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Team-based vs. problem-based learning in undergraduate surgery: a randomized controlled trial in Saudi Arabia.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Team-based learning (TBL) in clinical disciplines for undergraduate medical students-a scoping review.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Assessment of the Effectiveness of Team-based Learning Activities on Learning Outcomes in the Undergraduate Immunology Classroom.ImmunoHorizons · 2024Article
- In-Person or Online? The Effect of Delivery Mode on Team-Based Learning of Clinical Reasoning in a Family Medicine Clerkship.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Review
- Impact of a case-based collaborative learning curriculum on knowledge and learning preferences of dermatology residents.International journal of women's dermatology · 2020Article
- Students' Perceptions of Team-based Learning in an Undergraduate Nutrition School.MedEdPublish (2016) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to introduce team-based learning (TBL) as one of the teaching methods for diagnostics and to compare its teaching effectiveness with that of the traditional teaching methods.
methodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial on diagnostics teaching involving 111 third-year medical undergraduates, using TBL as the experimental intervention, compared with lecture-based learning as the control, for teaching the two topics of symptomatology. Individual Readiness Assurance Test (IRAT)-baseline and Group Readiness Assurance Test (GRAT) were performed in members of each TBL subgroup. The scores in Individual Terminal Test 1 (ITT1) immediately after class and Individual Terminal Test 2 (ITT2) 1 week later were compared between the two groups. The questionnaire and interview were also implemented to survey the attitude of students and teachers toward TBL.
resultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups in ITT1 (19.85±4.20 vs 19.70±4.61), while the score of the TBL group was significantly higher than that of the control group in ITT2 (19.15±3.93 vs 17.46±4.65). In the TBL group, the scores of the two terminal tests after the teaching intervention were significantly higher than the baseline test score of individuals. IRAT-baseline, ITT1, and ITT2 scores of students at different academic levels in the TBL teaching exhibited significant differences, but the ITT1-IRAT-baseline and ITT2-IRAT-baseline indicated no significant differences among the three subgroups.
conclusionOur TBL in symptomatology approach was highly accepted by students in the improvement of interest and self-directed learning and resulted in an increase in knowledge acquirements, which significantly improved short-term test scores compared with lecture-based learning. TBL is regarded as an effective teaching method worthy of promoting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.