Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30606170›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2019

Influence of critical thinking disposition on the learning efficiency of problem-based learning in undergraduate medical students.

Dan Pu, Juhua Ni, Demao Song, Weiguang Zhang, Yuedan Wang, Liling Wu, Xian Wang, Yun Wang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
49.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 152 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dan PuOffice of Education, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Juhua NiDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Demao SongDepartment of Physiology and Pathophysiology, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Weiguang ZhangDepartment of Anatomy, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Yuedan WangDepartment of Immunology, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Liling WuDepartment of Physiology and Pathophysiology, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Xian WangDepartment of Physiology and Pathophysiology, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China.
Yun WangDepartment of Neurobiology, Peking University School of Basic Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100083, China. wangy66@bjmu.edu.cn.
Peking University · CN

Funding

Chinese Medical Association Medical Education Branch and China Higher Education Society Medical Education Specialized Committee 2016 Medical Education Research Project 2016B-RC021National Found for Fostering Talents of Basic Science J1103605/J0108Peking University Health Science Center 2017 Medical Education Research Project 2017JJ10
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundProblem-based learning (PBL), a pedagogical approach, is widely accepted in medical education. Manipulated by many factors, the internal motivation of learner is the most crucial determinant that affects the nature of the outcome, in which the influences of critical thinking (CT) remained elusive.

methodsOne hundred two third-year undergraduate medical students at Peking University were involved in this study. A Chinese version of the Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CTDI-CV) was used to assess the CT disposition, and the performance scores of students in PBL tutorials were compiled. A parametric bivariate correlation analysis was performed between the students' CT scores and their PBL average scores. The PBL scores were compared between the strong and weak CT disposition groups using independent t-test. The analysis of numerical data was conducted using SPSS 16.0.

resultsCT disposition of third-year undergraduate medical students at Peking University was at a positive level, with an average score of 297.72. The total CT scores had a positive correlation with the scores of the PBL performance and its five dimensions significantly. In the majority, students with Strong-CT disposition obtained higher scores in PBL tutorials compared with students with Weak-CT disposition. The performance of these two groups was significantly different in the Late-Half but not in the Early-Half PBL tutorials. Furthermore, a significant improvement was observed in the students with strong CT but not weak CT dispositions.

conclusionCT disposition positively correlates to a students' PBL performance. Students with stronger CT dispositions perform better in the PBL process and obtain higher scores. Our work suggested that the open-mindedness of the CT disposition is the primary factor that determines the improvement of the preparation dimensions in the PBL process.

Indexed as

Self ConceptThinkingAdultClinical CompetenceEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleHumansMaleProblem-Based LearningStudents, MedicalYoung AdultCritical thinkingLearning efficiencyPersonal characteristicsProblem-based learning

Identifiers

PMID30606170
PMCPMC6318932
OpenAlexW2924919762

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.