Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32853214›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2020

Flipped classroom improves nursing students' theoretical learning in China: A meta-analysis.

Bao-Zhu Li, Nv-Wei Cao, Chun-Xia Ren, Xiu-Jie Chu, Hao-Yue Zhou, Biao Guo

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

6 authors.

Bao-Zhu LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8081-9857
Nv-Wei CaoDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Chun-Xia RenDepartment of Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, P.R. China.
Xiu-Jie ChuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Hao-Yue ZhouDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Biao GuoDepartment of Human Resource, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Anhui, Hefei, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAt present, current didactic teaching delivery method help nursing students apply theory to clinical situations in an inefficient way. The flipped classroom (FC), a novel teaching mode emphasizing self-study and critical thinking, has generated interest in nursing education in China. However, there are a gap in the literature and no consistent outcomes of current studies which compared FC and lecture-based learning (LBL), and no systematic review has comprehensively compared theoretical scores as an affected outcome in FC versus LBL modes.

methodsIn this review, we analyze flipped-learning nursing students' scores, and aim to assess the efficacy and provide a deeper understanding of the FC in nursing education. Following the inclusion criteria, articles were obtained by searching PubMed, Embase and Chinese data, including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, and VIP database until 3 January 2020. Data were extracted from eligible articles and quality was assessed. A meta-analysis was then performed using a random effects model with a standardized mean value (SMD) and a 95% confidence interval (CI).32 studies were included after reviewing 2,439 citations. All studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The FC theoretical knowledge scores in FC were significantly positively affected compared to those of the traditional classroom (SMD = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.02-1.64; P < 0.001). In addition, 23 studies reported skill scores, indicating significant difference between the FC mode and LBL mode (SMD = 1.58, 95%CI: 1.23-1.93; P < 0.001).

conclusionsThe results of this meta-analysis suggest that compared to the LBL teaching method, the FC mode dose significantly improve Chinese nursing students' theoretical scores. However, the problems of heterogeneity and publication bias in this study need to be remedied high-quality future studies.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalLearningStudents, NursingChinaEducational MeasurementFeedbackHumansKnowledgePublication BiasRisk

Identifiers

PMID32853214
PMCPMC7451570

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.