Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36567984›Full record

ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2022

Teacher-led versus student-led seminar blended with portfolio for "assessment of learning": An interventional study.

Arunita Jagzape, Tushar Bharat Jagzape

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Arunita JagzapeDepartment of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.
Tushar Bharat JagzapeDepartment of Pediatrics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncrease in competitive demands has led to the promotion of seminar presentation by the students to increase active learning and for the assessment of learning. Portfolios are an important tool for assessment for learning. The objectives of the study were to compare the gain in knowledge among the conventional and the blended seminar groups (intervention group), analyze the working portfolios to assess for learning, and to gather the perception of students. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was an interventional study (2016) with convenience sampling that included 27 students each in the conventional and interventional groups. It was conducted in a medical college in central India. The conventional group was teacher led and the blended seminar group was student led with interaction with the students regarding the contents of the portfolio. Student's unpaired and paired

resultsSignificant difference was found between the conventional and intervention groups (

conclusionThe present study showed that seminar when blended with portfolio yielded positive results in the process of learning, and hence was effective in assessment for learning.

Indexed as

Assessment for Learningportfolioreflectionseminar

Identifiers

PMID36567984
PMCPMC9768703

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.