SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2022
A systematic review on lecturing in contemporary university teaching.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- How oral cancer is taught: a scoping review.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Review
- Research methodology education in Europe: a multi-country, cross-disciplinary survey of current practices and perspectives.Research integrity and peer review · 2025Article
- Systematic observation of participatory interaction in university lectures: a multiple case study with a mixed methods approach.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- T-pattern detection in the scientific literature of this century: A systematic review.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Articles published in scientific journals, concerning the present and future of the lecture format in university education in the twenty-first century are framed within organizational settings that drive teaching methodologies in line with educational policies. The following two research questions have arisen from articles in which debate the continuity of this teaching modality and propose improvements of a different nature: (1) Is there an interest in renovating the lecture format among the international research community whose remit is university teaching methods? and (2) What improvements to the lecture format do the reviewed articles suggest, within the framework of the communicative matrix of interactive learning? Method: We have carried out a systematic review guided by the PRISMA approach, emphasizing the interest in methodological conceptual commitment, paying attention to documents published in journals with an impact factor. The search strategy was applied homogeneously in three databases: ERIC, PsycInfo, and Web of Science, following the systematic process of inclusion/exclusion. Results: Forty-five articles were selected with a range of 0-78 quotations, from different fields of knowledge and five continents; 12 articles are from journals with a JCR impact factor. The journal articles cover communicative (21), cognitive (13) and active-practical perspectives (11); the predominant governing aim of the analyzed improvements is connected with the attendees' academic performance results (24); the reviewed studies belong mainly to the quantitative paradigm (42). The considerations derived from the results (45) cover formative, technical and/or critical aspects. Discussion and conclusions: Whilst positively valuing all these efforts promoted by the European Higher Education Area, we have also verified the lack of contributions in line with our concerns that embrace the need to develop an in-depth conceptualization, supported by a methodology that is sensitive to the complexity of the oral communication format between an expert actor and non-specialized actors who wish to connect and collaborate with the expert in the production of knowledge.
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.