Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33777556›Full record

ArticleCureus2021

To Flip or Not to Flip: Learning Style Preferences among Millennial Physician Assistant Students.

Katherine Schultz, Alicia Schaffer, Rebecca Rebman, Anthony Shanks

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Katherine SchultzObstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA.
Alicia SchafferObstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA.
Rebecca RebmanMedicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA.
Anthony ShanksObstetrics and Gynecology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPresenting material in a manner that is most palatable to students is important to improve the learning process. We evaluated the efficacy of different teaching styles including the flipped classroom and assessed the learning style preferences of a cohort of medical learners in a preclinical obstetrics and gynecology course.

methodsWe conducted three teaching sessions with 35 physician assistant students. A different teaching style was implemented for each session including a traditional lecture with interactive learning technology augmentation, a flipped classroom, and a hybrid approach incorporating lecture and group work. Students were surveyed using a Likert scale regarding the efficacy of the format, clinical relevance of the material, and their learning preference for future sessions.

resultsStudents rated the traditional approach as the most effective, most relevant, and most preferred method. Students preferred the flipped classroom least, but they rated it as slightly more effective and relevant than the hybrid approach.

conclusionThe teaching style of various coursework including the preclinical obstetrics and gynecology curriculum may not need to be altered for millennial learners. This study showed the flipped classroom was the least favored teaching style and that there was a marked preference by students for a more traditional didactic lecture.

Indexed as

educationflippingobstetricsstylesteaching

Identifiers

PMID33777556
PMCPMC7986445

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.