ArticleBMC medical education2023
Evaluating the effectiveness of a new student-centred laboratory training strategy in clinical biochemistry teaching.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating Case-Based Learning (CBL) and Concept Mapping (CM) enhances learning outcomes in medical biochemistry.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Advancing clinical biochemistry: addressing gaps and driving future innovations.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- A four-Axis-Method to Evaluate a Part of an Undergraduate Medical Students' Curriculum.Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe error-proneness in the preanalytical and postanalytical stages is higher than that in the analytical stage of the total testing process. However, preanalytical and postanalytical quality management has not received enough attention in medical laboratory education and tests in clinical biochemistry courses. METHODS/APPROACH: Clinical biochemistry teaching program aim to improve students' awareness and ability of quality management according to international organization for standardization 15,189 requirements. We designed a student-centred laboratory training program, according to case-based learning that included 4 stages: "establish an overall testing process based on the patient's clinical indicator, clarify principles, improve operational skills, and review process and continuous improvement". The program was implemented in our college during the winter semesters of 2019 and 2020. A total of 185 undergraduate students majoring in medical laboratory science participated in the program as a test group, and the other 172 students were set up as the control group and adopted the conventional method. The participants were asked to finish an online survey to evaluate the class at the end. RESULTS/OUTCOMES: The test group had significantly better examination scores not only in experimental operational skills (89.27 ± 7.16 vs. 77.51 ± 4.72, p < 0.05 in 2019 grade, 90.31 ± 5.35 vs. 72.87 ± 8.41 in 2020 grade) but also in total examination (83.47 ± 6.16 vs. 68.90 ± 5.86 in 2019 grade, 82.42 ± 5.72 vs. 69.55 ± 7.54 in 2020 grade) than the control group. The results of the questionnaire survey revealed that the students in the test group better achieved classroom goals than those in the control group (all p < 0.05).
conclusionsThe new student-centred laboratory training program based on case-based learning in clinical biochemistry is an effective and acceptable strategy compared with the conventional training program.
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.