Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35262226›Full record

Trial reportMedical education2022

Does group size matter during collaborative skills learning? A randomised study.

Laerke Marijke Noerholk, Anne Mette Morcke, Kulamakan Kulasegaram, Lone N Nørgaard, Lotte Harmsen, Lisbeth Anita Andreasen, Nina Gros Pedersen, Vilma Johnsson, Anishan Vamadevan, Martin Grønnebaek Tolsgaard

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Laerke Marijke NoerholkCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-0838-0338
Anne Mette MorckeCentre for Educational Development, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Kulamakan KulasegaramDepartment of Family & Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6644-0098
Lone N NørgaardCenter of Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lotte HarmsenCenter of Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Lisbeth Anita AndreasenCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nina Gros PedersenFetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Vilma JohnssonCenter of Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anishan VamadevanCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Martin Grønnebaek TolsgaardCopenhagen Academy for Medical Education and Simulation (CAMES), Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-9197-5564
Copenhagen University Hospital · DKAarhus University · DKHerlev Hospital · DKHvidovre Hospital · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DKUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

Clinical CompetenceSimulation TrainingEducational MeasurementHumansLearningUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID35262226
PMCPMC9313549
OpenAlexW4220759174

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.