ReviewCureus2022
Team-Based Learning Among Health Care Professionals: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
27 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of team based learning in teaching medical ethics: a systematic review.BMC medical ethics · 2025Pooled it
- Team-based learning in health professions education: an umbrella review.BMC medical education · 2024Pooled it
- Team-based learning vs. lecture-based learning in nursing: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Collaborative Testing in Medical Education: Insights from a Hybrid Individual-Group Examination Approach.Medical science educator · 2026Article
- The Relationship Between Sense of Community and Collaborative Learning: Quantitative Study in Medical Education.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating the educational effectiveness of team-based cadaveric dissection in undergraduate anatomy training.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Integrating cinemeducation and entrepreneurship for experiential learning in public health.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Does medical students' perception of team-based learning have an impact on achieving planned learning outcomes?BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Endless justification: A scoping review of team-based learning research in medical education.Medical education · 2026Article
- Review
- Undergraduate medical students' perceptions of an interactive and collaborative cloud-based learning strategy: survey at a single institution.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Teaching Python with team-based learning: using cloud-based notebooks for interactive coding education.FEBS open bio · 2025Article
- Effect of Team-Based Learning Interventions on the Learning Competency of Korean Nursing Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Implementing Team-Based Learning in Physiotherapy Education: Students' Perceptions and Preferences Compared to the Traditional Lecture.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- [Digital tools in residency and continuing medical education within the framework of a digital media concept].Die Anaesthesiologie · 2024Review
- Construction of knowledge sharing network indicator system for medication therapy management service training teams based on social network analysis.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Student feedback on team-based learning in a preclinical oral surgery course: A pilot study.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2024Article
- Team-, case-, lecture- and evidence-based learning in medical postgraduates training.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Team-based learning versus traditional teaching effect on pharmacy Students' Performance: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2024Article
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 at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduced in the 1970s to meet the academic needs of a growing number of students with relatively stagnant faculty, team-based learning (TBL) has revolutionized the modern classroom structure. Contrary to the traditional didactic model where the teacher assumes the central role and students are passive listeners, TBL participants are actively involved in the learning process. Teachers act as facilitators while the TBL participants work in groups to solve problems through engagement with their peers. The objective of the article is to conduct a systematic review on team-based learning using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline. The studies were searched in databases like PubMed®, Scopus®, Embase®, and PubMed Central® using appropriate keywords. Two authors screened the papers, and a third author resolved the conflicts. This was followed by a bibliographic review based on the references of the selected study and bias assessment using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tool. The team-based learning model is increasingly being used by different institutions globally. TBL and traditional lecture-based teaching outcomes revealed that TBL participants performed better in academic, clinical, and communication domains. In addition, TBL enhanced learners' engagement, collaborative spirit, and satisfaction. Our study results are similar to the prior meta-analysis and systematic review. Nevertheless, this systematic review remains more comprehensive, up-to-date, and inclusive thus far. Team-based learning is a pragmatic and superior approach to learning among health care professionals. It has resulted in better academic, clinical, and communication outcomes. This finding spans all the medical and allied professions studied in this systematic review.
Indexed as
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.