Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38890615›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2024

Team-, case-, lecture- and evidence-based learning in medical postgraduates training.

Tianlong Huang, Shun Zhou, Qiaoyan Wei, Chun Ding

Abstract read
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 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

Tianlong HuangDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, 139 Renmin Middle Road, Changsha, 410011, China.
Shun ZhouDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, 139 Renmin Middle Road, Changsha, 410011, China.
Qiaoyan WeiDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, 139 Renmin Middle Road, Changsha, 410011, China.
Chun DingDepartment of Ophthalmology, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, 139 Renmin Middle Road, Changsha, 410011, China. chunding@csu.edu.cn.

Funding

Exploration and Application of Double Helix Teaching Mode in Clinical Medicine Education under the background of New Medical Construction HNJG-2022-0023 Key Research Project of Teaching Reform in Colleges and Universities of Hunan Province. HNJG-2022-0023
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of team-, case-, lecture-, and evidence-based learning (TCLEBL) methods in cultivating students' clinical and research abilities, as compared to traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) approaches.

methodsForty-one medical postgraduates were divided into two groups, a TCLEBL group and an LBL group. Teaching effectiveness was evaluated through student- and teacher-feedback questionnaires, scores from theoretical examinations and written literature reviews, and student learning burdens.

resultsCompared to the LBL approach, both teachers and students were more satisfied with the TCLEBL model (p < 0.001 for both teachers and students). The TCLEBL group performed significantly higher on the theory test compared to the LBL group (p = 0.009). There were significant differences between the LBL and TCLEBL groups, respectively, in terms of literature review and citations (12.683 ± 2.207 vs. 16.302 ± 1.095, p < 0.001), argument and perspective (12.55 ± 1.572 vs. 16.333 ± 1.354, p < 0.001), comprehensiveness of content (13.3 ± 2.268 vs. 16.683 ± 1.344, p < 0.001), and scientific rigor and accuracy (10.317 ± 1.167 vs. 12.746 ± 0.706, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the total extracurricular time expended between the two groups (323.75 ± 30.987 min vs. 322.619 ± 24.679 min, respectively for LBL vs. TCLEBL groups, p = 0.898).

conclusionsTCLEBL is an effective teaching method that cultivates students' clinical and research abilities.

Indexed as

Problem-Based LearningEducational MeasurementEducation, Medical, GraduateFemaleHumansMaleStudents, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesTeachingLecture-based learningLiterature review writingMedical postgraduatesTeam-, case-, lecture-, evidence-based learningTheoretical examination

Identifiers

PMID38890615
PMCPMC11184766

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.