ArticleGMS journal for medical education2017
Refinement of a training concept for tutors in problem-based learning.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Employing students' evaluations and tutors' perceptions to evaluate a faculty development program on problem-based learning at the Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Does prior knowledge affect interaction dynamics and learning achievement in digital problem-based learning? A pilot study.GMS journal for medical education · 2023Article
- Does the tutors' academic background influence the learning objectives in problem-based learning?GMS journal for medical education · 2020Article
- Faculty Development - Full Steam Ahead!GMS journal for medical educationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of problem-based learning (PBL) in the Charité Berlin Human Medicine model curriculum requires the annual training of 80 to 100 new PBL tutors using PBL tutor training (PTT). Therefore, the following three measures were taken: The existing traditional PTT (Trad-PTT) was further developed into an interactive PTT (Inter-PTT), which is using more interactive teaching tools. Both PTT concepts ran for 12 months, respectively. The review of the Inter-PTT was significantly better, as the PBL tutors understood their tasks within the PBL process better and felt more motivated. A follow-up survey after the initial experience with PBL confirmed almost all the positive aspects of the Inter-PTT. In addition, the Inter-PTT was also offered to non-clinicians and other scientific staff to make the training interdisciplinary. PTT made it possible to communicate beyond specialist boundaries; however, the interdisciplinary idea was no longer detectable in the follow-up survey. In order to increase the number of available PBL tutors, a self-commitment was introduced for the departments. This increased the number of "involuntary" participants for PTT, but reduced the amount of necessary training courses. The fulfilment of self-commitment succeeded in almost all departments. A PTT tailored to the needs of the tutors is a basic prerequisite in order to excite teachers about PBL and to familiarise them with their role as learning facilitators. The increase of interactive teaching forms led to a joint interdisciplinary learning process within PTT. The excellent review of Inter-PTT makes it a solid basis for further training concepts.
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.