ArticleCureus2023
Is There a Case for Case-Based Learning in Pharmacology?
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment of clinical pharmacology and competence during medicine clerkships.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Review
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background In a didactic lecture (DL), students listen, take notes, and passively accept the knowledge. Case-based learning (CBL) uses clinical cases for active learning and productive outcome. Although some studies have shown that DL is less effective than CBL, the results were inconclusive. Hence, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of CBL in pharmacology. Methodology This study involved 80 second-year medical students divided into two groups. The results of post-test scores and retention test one month later were compared between the groups using multiple-choice questions. Results DL showed statistically significant better outcomes in immediate learning compared to CBL in both groups (p = 0.000 and 0.002). Although there were slightly better retention scores for CBL compared to DL in both groups, it was not statistically significant. Conclusions DL showed significantly better immediate learning outcomes compared to CBL, with no difference in long-term outcomes for both teaching-learning methods. Hence, DL continues to be the gold standard for teaching pharmacology.
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.