ArticleBMC medical education2022
Bullet screen in pre-clinical undergraduate pharmacology education: a survey study.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe lack of interaction and communication in pharmacology courses, especially since the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, which required a fast shift to remote learning at medical schools, leads to an unsatisfactory learning outcome. New interactive teaching approaches are required to improve pharmacology learning attention and interaction in remote education and traditional classrooms.
methodsWe introduced bullet screens to pharmacology teaching. Then, a survey was distributed to first-, second- and third-year pre-clinical undergraduate medical and nursing students at the Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from November 2020 to March 2022. We evaluated the essential features, instructional effectiveness, and entertainment value of bullet screens. Responses to structured and open-ended questions about the strengths and weaknesses of the bullet screen and overall thoughts were coded and compared between medical and nursing students.
resultsIn terms of essential features, bullet screens have a high degree of acceptability among students, and this novel instructional style conveniently increased classroom interaction. Considering instructional effectiveness, bullet screen may stimulate students' in-depth thinking. Meanwhile, students tended to use bullet-screen comments as a way to express their support rather than to make additional comments or to express their different viewpoints. The entertainment value of bullet screen was noteworthy. The lack of ideas might lead to relative differences between medical and nursing students, indicating that guiding the appropriate use of bullet screen is necessary.
conclusionsThe bullet screen may be popularized as an auxiliary teaching approach to promote interaction between teachers and students in the classroom as well as during remote education. It is an interesting and beneficial tool in pharmacology courses, yet there are several aspects of this device that should be improved for popularization.
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.