Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34476742›Full record

ArticleAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2021

Evaluating the Efficacy and Optimisation of the Peer-Led Flipped Model Using TEL Resources Within Neuroanatomy.

Deepika Anbu, Alistair Robson, Octavia Kurn, Charles Taylor, Oliver Dean, December Payne, Eva Nagy, Charlotte Harrison, Samuel Hall, Scott Border

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

10 authors.

Deepika AnbuFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Alistair RobsonFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Octavia KurnFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Charles TaylorFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Oliver DeanFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
December PayneFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Eva NagyFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Charlotte HarrisonOxford University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, UK.
Samuel HallUniversity Hospital Southampton, NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.
Scott BorderFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. s.border@soton.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The flipped classroom (where students prepare before and then develop understanding during class) and technology-enhanced learning (audio-visual learning tools) are increasingly used to supplement anatomy teaching. However, the supporting literature lacks robust methodology and is conflicting in demonstrating efficacy outcomes. Contrastingly, near-peer teaching (where senior students teach juniors on the same academic programme) is well researched and reported to be both effective and versatile. This provides an ideal vehicle in which to investigate and potentially optimise these approaches.This study aims to assess educational impact of the peer-led flipped model and student engagement and perceptions regarding traditional and TEL resources.A quasi-randomised, cross-sectional study was conducted with 281 second-year University of Southampton medical students. Students were randomly allocated to 3 groups: traditional lecture (control), flipped text resource, or flipped video resource. The first group received no pre-teaching material, but the flipped groups received a text or video pre-teaching resource. Objective outcomes measured were: Knowledge gain and retention via multiple-choice questionnaires and formative exams Student perceptions and engagement using questionnaires and 2 focus groups All groups demonstrated significant knowledge gain post-teaching (p < 0.0001). However, regardless of engagement with pre-teaching material, no significant difference was found in knowledge gain or retention between the groups. Students engaged 21.1% more with the text rather than video resource (p = 0.0019), but spent equal time using both (p = 0.0948). All resources and teaching approaches were perceived 'very useful' with no significant differences found between groups. A qualitative approach utilising thematic analysis of focus groups identified 4 themes, including 'Attitudes towards flipped classroom', which revealed mixed reviews and perceptions from participants.This study has found the peer-led flipped model is of no detriment to educational impact compared to peer-led traditional approaches in a well-established peer teaching programme in undergraduate medicine at the University of Southampton. Students value traditional and video resources but engage with them differently. Additionally, it was reported that in this experiment, NPT did not seem well suited to the flipped classroom, suggesting a rare limitation of the utility of NPT application within an anatomy curriculum.

Indexed as

NeuroanatomyStudents, MedicalCross-Sectional StudiesCurriculumHumansLearningAnatomyFlipped classroomMedical educationMultimedia learningNear-peer teachingTechnology-enhanced learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.