Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31418653›Full record

ArticleCBE life sciences education2019

Mixed Student Ideas about Mechanisms of Human Weight Loss.

Kamali N Sripathi, Rosa A Moscarella, Rachel Yoho, Hye Sun You, Mark Urban-Lurain, John Merrill, Kevin Haudek

Erratum issuedOpen access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CBE life sciences education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Introductory biology undergraduate students' mixed ideas about genetic information flow.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    2020
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kamali N SripathiCREATE for STEM Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
Rosa A MoscarellaBiology Department, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst, MA 01003.
Rachel YohoProject Dragonfly and Department of Biology, Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056.
Hye Sun YouDepartment of Physical Sciences, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, AR 72801.
Mark Urban-LurainCREATE for STEM Institute, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
John MerrillDepartment of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
Kevin HaudekDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824.
Michigan State University · USArkansas Tech University · USMiami University · USUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent calls for college biology education reform have identified "pathways and transformations of matter and energy" as a big idea in biology crucial for students to learn. Previous work has been conducted on how college students think about such matter-transforming processes; however, little research has investigated how students connect these ideas. Here, we probe student thinking about matter transformations in the familiar context of human weight loss. Our analysis of 1192 student constructed responses revealed three scientific (which we label "Normative") and five less scientific (which we label "Developing") ideas that students use to explain weight loss. Additionally, students combine these ideas in their responses, with an average number of 2.19 ± 1.07 ideas per response, and 74.4% of responses containing two or more ideas. These results highlight the extent to which students hold multiple (both correct and incorrect) ideas about complex biological processes. We described student responses as conforming to either Scientific, Mixed, or Developing descriptive models, which had an average of 1.9 ± 0.6, 3.1 ± 0.9, and 1.7 ± 0.8 ideas per response, respectively. Such heterogeneous student thinking is characteristic of difficulties in both conceptual change and early expertise development and will require careful instructional intervention for lasting learning gains.

Indexed as

StudentsEducational MeasurementHumansLearningModels, EducationalWeight Loss

Identifiers

PMID31418653
PMCPMC6755313
OpenAlexW2967799312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.