Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35831757›Full record

Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2022

Application of test-enhanced learning (TEL) in obstetrics and gynecology: a prospective study.

Florian Recker, Nicolas Haverkamp, Alexander Mustea, Ulrich Gembruch, Tobias Raupach

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Medical education in obstetrics and gynecology: A global update from 2025.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors.

Florian ReckerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany. florian.recker@ukbonn.de.ORCID 0000-0001-9135-4338
Nicolas HaverkampStudent's Dean Office, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Alexander MusteaDepartment of Gynecology and Gynecological Oncology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Ulrich GembruchDepartment of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Tobias RaupachInstitute for Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveClinical reasoning is an essential skill, the foundations of which should be acquired during medical school. Within the format of test-based learning, such examinations can also be used to support the long-term retention of procedural knowledge necessary for clinical reasoning. The aim was to investigate whether repeated exposure to clinical cases in obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) with built-in questions leads to higher learning outcome than pure reading cases and what influence the delay between the intervention and the final test has on the retention of the respective content.

methodsIn this non-randomised crossover study, 5th-year medical students (duration of the study is 6 years) taking a 1-week clinical attachment in OBGYN participated in computer-based case seminars in winter term 2020/2021, in which different case histories on gynecological-obstetric diseases were presented. Case content was identical for all groups, but the presentation format (cases with key feature questions vs read-only cases) of individual case vignettes changed weekly. The also intervention was repeated after 2 weeks for each group. Knowledge was assessed in an entry and an exit exam consisting of 40 short-answer questions.

resultsA total of 94 out of 118 eligible students participated in the study (response rate: 79.7%). Learning outcome was significantly higher for items presented in the key feature format compared to items presented as read-only cases (74.2 ± 8.6% vs. 71.0 ± 9.2%; p = 0.017). Furthermore, the analysis showed that the temporal distance of the intervention package from the final examination had no influence on retention.

conclusionThis is the first study to demonstrate an effect of test-enhanced learning on clinical reasoning in the subject of OGBYN. In this cross-over study, repeated testing was more effective than repeated case-based learning alone. Curricular implementation of longitudinal key feature testing can thus improve learning outcomes for OBGYN.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalGynecologyObstetricsStudents, MedicalCross-Over StudiesEducational MeasurementHumansLearningProspective StudiesGynecologyMedical educationObstetricsTest-enhanced learning

Identifiers

PMID35831757
PMCPMC9281379

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.