Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36384542›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2022

Effectiveness comparison between blended learning of histology practical in flipped physical classrooms and flipped virtual classrooms for MBBS students.

Jinjie Zhong, Zhongjie Li, Xinyang Hu, Linlin Wang, Yingying Chen

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Teaching Cellular Architecture: The Global Status of Histology Education.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jinjie ZhongThe Department of Basic Medical Science, and The Medical Education Research Center, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Yuhangtang Road 866, Xihu District, Hangzhou, 310058, China. 0017152@zju.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7645-8400
Zhongjie LiThe Department of Basic Medical Science, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.
Xinyang HuThe Manchester Institute of Education, School of Environment, Education and Development, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK.
Linlin WangThe Department of Basic Medical Science, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.
Yingying ChenThe Department of Basic Medical Science, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, 310058, China.
Zhejiang University · CNUniversity of Manchester · GBZhejiang Chinese Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe flipped classroom blended learning model has been proven effective in the teaching of undergraduate medical courses as shown by student acceptance and results. Since COVID-19 necessitated the application of online learning in Histology practical for MBBS students, the effectiveness of the blended learning model on teaching quality has required additional attention.

methodsA blended learning of histology practical was flipped in a virtual classroom (FVCR-BL) or in a physical classroom (FPCR-BL) in School of Medicine, Zhejiang University in China. Students were split into FVCR-BL group (n = 146) due to COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 or were randomly allocated into FPCR-BL group (n = 93) in 2021, and retrospectively, students with traditional learning in 2019 were allocated into traditional learning model in a physical classroom (PCR-TL) group (n = 89). Same learning requirements were given for 3 groups; all informative and summative scores of students were collected; a questionnaire of student satisfaction for blended learning activities were surveyed in 2021. Data of scores and scales were analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis test and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test in SPSS Statics software.

resultsThe results clarified that FPCR-BL students obtained higher final exam scores and were more likely to engage in face-to-face interactions with instructors than FVCR-BL students. FPCR-BL and FVCR-BL students had higher classroom quiz scores than the PCR-TL students owing to the contribution of blended learning. The results of the questionnaire showed that participants of FPCR-BL positively rated the online learning and preview test, with a cumulative percentage of 68.31%, were more satisfying than other learning activities of blended learning. There were significant correlations (r = 0.581, P < 0.05) between online learning and the other three blended learning strategies.

conclusionsIn the flipped classroom with a blended learning process of histology practical, enhancing the quality of online learning boosts student satisfaction and improves knowledge learning; peer-to-peer interactions and instructor-to-peer interactions in the physical classroom improved knowledge construction.

Indexed as

COVID-19Problem-Based LearningCurriculumHumansPandemicsRetrospective StudiesStudentsBachelor of medicine, bachelor of surgery (MBBS) studentBlended learningFlipped in physical classroomFlipped in virtual classroomHistology practicalSatisfactionStudent scoreTraditional learning

Identifiers

PMID36384542
PMCPMC9668391
OpenAlexW4309467501

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.