Trial reportMedical education2022
Does group size matter during collaborative skills learning? A randomised study.
Trial report in Medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does group size matter during collaborative skills learning? A randomised study.Medical education · 2022Trial
- Point-of-care ultrasound in primary care - EFSUMB core curriculum and training recommendations - a position paper.Ultraschall in der Medizin (Stuttgart, Germany : 1980) · 2026Article
- A Blended Case-Based and Practical Training Framework for Graduate Ultrasound Education: A Perspective on Competency-Based Instruction.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Exploring the dynamics of ultrasound training in medical education: current trends, debates, and approaches to didactics and hands-on learning.BMC medical education · 2024Review
- Project-Based Learning Adapted as a Physiology Teaching Strategy for the Sophomore Undergraduate Medical Students.Medical science educator · 2024Article
- Current status of ultrasound training in obstetrics and gynecology: a scoping literature review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Exploring Optimal Group Sizes for Learning in Medical Simulation: A Systematic Review.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCollaborative skills learning in the form of dyad learning compared with individual learning has been shown to lead to non-inferior skills retention and transfer. However, we have limited knowledge on which learning activities improve collaborative skills training and how the number of collaborators may impact skills transfer. We explored the effects of skills training individually, in dyads, triads or tetrads on learning activities during training and on subsequent skills transfer.
methodsIn a randomised, controlled study, participants completed a pre-post-transfer-test set-up in groups of one to four. Participants completed 2 hours of obstetric ultrasound training. In the dyad, triad and tetrad group participants took turns actively handling the ultrasound probe. All performances were rated by two blinded experts using the Objective Structured Assessment of Ultrasound Skills (OSAUS) scale and a Global Rating Scale (GRS). All training was video recorded, and learning activities were analysed using the Interactive-Constructive-Active-Passive (ICAP) framework.
resultsOne hundred one participants completed the simulation-based training, and ninety-seven completed the transfer test. Performance scores improved significantly from pre- to post-test for all groups (p < 0.001, ηp
conclusionCollaborative skills learning in groups of up to four did not impair skills transfer despite less hands-on time. This may be explained by a compensatory shift towards constructive and interactive learning activities that outweigh the effect of shorter hands-on time.
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.