Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37198639›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2023

Using cognitive load theory to evaluate and improve preparatory materials and study time for the flipped classroom.

Krisztina Fischer, Amy M Sullivan, Amy P Cohen, Randall W King, Barbara A Cockrill, Henrike C Besche

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Application of Flipped Classroom Integrated with ChatGPT in Improving Graduate Education on Choroidal Melanoma.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Krisztina FischerDepartment of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Amy M SullivanDepartment of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Amy P CohenHarvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Randall W KingDepartment of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Barbara A CockrillDepartment of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Henrike C BescheProgram in Medical Education, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Henrike_Besche@hms.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreclinical medical education is content-dense and time-constrained. Flipped classroom approaches promote durable learning, but challenges with unsatisfactory student preparation and high workload remain. Cognitive load theory defines instructional design as "efficient" if learners can master the presented concepts without cognitive overload. We created a PReparatory Evaluation Process (PREP) to systematically assess and measure improvement in the cognitive-load efficiency of preparatory materials and impact on study time (time-efficiency).

methodsWe conducted this study in a flipped, multidisciplinary course for ~ 170 first year students at Harvard Medical School using a naturalistic post-test design. For each flipped session (n = 97), we assessed cognitive load and preparatory study time by administering a 3-item PREP survey embedded within a short subject-matter quiz students completed before class. Over three years (2017-2019), we evaluated cognitive load- and time- based efficiency to guide iterative revisions of the materials by content experts. The ability of PREP to detect changes to the instructional design (sensitivity) was validated through a manual audit of the materials.

resultsThe average survey response rate was ≥ 94%. Content expertise was not required to interpret PREP data. Initially students did not necessarily allocate the most study time to the most difficult content. Over time, the iterative changes in instructional design increased the cognitive load- and time-based efficiency of preparatory materials with large effect sizes (p < .01). Furthermore, this increased the overall alignment of cognitive load with study time: students allocated more time to difficult content away from more familiar, less difficult content without increasing workload overall.

conclusionsCognitive load and time constraints are important parameters to consider when designing curricula. The PREP process is learner-centered, grounded in educational theory, and works independently of content knowledge. It can provide rich and actionable insights into instructional design of flipped classes not captured by traditional satisfaction-based evaluations.

Indexed as

CurriculumEducation, MedicalCognitionHumansLearningProblem-Based LearningSurveys and QuestionnairesCognitive load theoryEducational quality improvementEfficiencyFlipped classroomInstructional design

Identifiers

PMID37198639
PMCPMC10193725

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.