ArticleCureus2024
Introducing Group Open-Book Exams as a Learning and Assessment Strategy in the Clinical Biochemistry Course for Medical Students.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTeachers constantly strive to obtain reliable and appropriate teaching and assessment methods to maximize the learning experience. This study aimed to introduce combined modified team-based learning and open-book exams (TBL/OBEs) as learning and assessment strategies in clinical biochemistry for medical students and assess students' perceptions.
methodsSecond-year medical students enrolled in the clinical biochemistry course were included in this study and subjected to TBL/OBE assessment. The assessment included two parts: the open-book format for half of the questions and the closed-book format for the other as a control. Upon completing the combined TBL/OBE session, the students were required to complete a structured survey to evaluate their perception of the experience. The data were gathered and analyzed. Data were presented as mean±standard error of the mean (SEM), and a p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsA total of 358 students completed the TBL/OBE and closed-book exam (CBE) and responded to the survey. Of these students, 76% preferred the OBE, and 84% thought it was a suitable learning method. On the one hand, the mean difficulty of the OBE format was 92.7±1.5 SEM, while, for the CBE, the mean difficulty was 88.7±1.9 SEM (p=0.015). On the other hand, the mean discrimination factor for OBE was 0.26±0.04 and, for the CBE, 0.41±0.04 SEM (p=0.0016). Males found the OBE questions easier (p=0.025) and less stressful (p=0.01).
conclusionA combined model of modified TBL and OBE is a successful learning and assessment strategy in clinical biochemistry for medical students.
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.