Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38172844›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2024

Team-based learning (TBL) in clinical disciplines for undergraduate medical students-a scoping review.

Irene Sterpu, Lotta Herling, Jonas Nordquist, Jerome Rotgans, Ganesh Acharya

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
15.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Irene SterpuDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. irene.sterpu@ki.se.
Lotta HerlingDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jonas NordquistDepartment of Medicine (Huddinge), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jerome RotgansDepartment of Medicine (Huddinge), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ganesh AcharyaDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Karolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTeam-based learning (TBL) is an evidence-based pedagogical method that has been used in undergraduate medical education since 2001. However, its use in clinical disciplines is rarely reported, and the impact of its implementation is not known. The aim of this study was to explore and map the published literature on the impact of implementing TBL in clinical disciplines in undergraduate medical education.

methodsA comprehensive search of Medline, Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), and Web of Science databases was performed on November 24, 2021 and updated April 6, 2023, using relevant Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free-text terms. Original research studies reporting on the implementation of TBL in clinical disciplines in undergraduate medical education published in peer-reviewed English language journals were included irrespective of their methodological design.

resultsThe initial search identified 2,383 records. Of these, 49 met the inclusion criteria. Most of the studies (n = 44, 90%) described the implementation of a modified version of TBL in which one or more TBL steps were missing, and one study had undefined protocol for the implementation. The most reported outcomes were knowledge acquisition (n = 38, 78%) and students' satisfaction or attitudes toward TBL (n = 34, 69%). Despite some differences in their results, the studies found that implementing TBL is associated with increased knowledge acquisition (n = 19, 39%), student engagement (n = 6, 12%), and student satisfaction (n = 31, 63%).

conclusionsMost of the studies reported positive results in students' satisfaction and students' engagement, whilst the results on knowledge acquisition and retention were more contradictory. In most of the studies, TBL was implemented in a modified form and diverse comparators were used. The methodological quality also varied. Thus, no unequivocal conclusions could be drawn regarding the value of implementing TBL in clinical disciplines. More studies with rigorous methodologies are needed in this field.

Indexed as

Problem-Based LearningStudents, MedicalEducational MeasurementGroup ProcessesHumansActive learningClinical disciplinesTeam-based learningUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID38172844
PMCPMC10765894
OpenAlexW4390570467

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.