ArticleAEM education and training2020
Dissecting the Contemporary Clerkship: Theory-based Educational Trial of Videos Versus Lectures in Medical Student Education.
Article in AEM education and training, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How to design effective educational videos for teaching evidence-based medicine to undergraduate learners - systematic review with complementing qualitative research to develop a practicable guide.Medical education online · 2024Pooled it
- Video-based, student tutor- versus faculty staff-led ultrasound course for medical students - a prospective randomized study.BMC medical education · 2020Trial
- Active Learning Strategies in Veterinary Medicine: A Literature Review.Veterinary medicine international · 2026Review
- An Emergency Medicine Virtual Clerkship: Made for COVID, Here to Stay.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Dissecting the Contemporary Clerkship: Theory-based Educational Trial of Videos Versus Lectures in Medical Student Education.AEM education and training · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite increasing use of the flipped classroom (FC) technique in undergraduate medical education, the benefit in learning outcomes over lectures is inconsistent. Best practices in preclass video design principles are rarely used, and it is unclear if videos can replace lectures in contemporary medical education.
methodsWe conducted a prospective quasi-experimental controlled educational study comparing theory-based videos to traditional lectures in a medical student curriculum. Medical students enrolled in an emergency medicine clerkship were randomly assigned to either a lecture group (LG) or a video group (VG). The slide content was identical, and the videos aligned with cognitive load theory-based multimedia design principles. Students underwent baseline (pretest), week 1 (posttest), and end-of-rotation (retention) written knowledge tests and an observed structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessment. We compared scores between both groups and surveyed student attitudes and satisfaction with respect to the two learning methods.
resultsThere were 104 students who participated in OSCE assessments (49 LG, 55 VG) and 101 students who participated in knowledge tests (48 LG, 53 VG). The difference in OSCE scores was statistically significant 1.29 (95% confidence interval = 0.23 to 2.35, t(102) = 2.43, p = 0.017), but the actual score difference was small from an educational standpoint (12.61 for LG, 11.32 for VG). All three knowledge test scores for both groups were not significantly different.
conclusionsVideos based on cognitive load theory produced similar results and could replace traditional lectures for medical students. Educators contemplating a FC approach should devote their valuable classroom time to active learning methods.
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.