Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39091291›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024

Perceptions of co-teaching as a pedagogical approach to integrate basic and clinical sciences.

Ivan Rodríguez-Martín, Emilia Condés, Judit Sánchez-Gómez, Clara Azpeleta, Antonio S Tutor, Marta Lesmes, Beatriz Gal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

7 authors.

Ivan Rodríguez-Martín *Faculty of Experimental Sciences, Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, Pozuelo de Alarcón, Spain.
Emilia Condés *Facultad de Ciencias Biomédicas y de la Salud, Departamento de Medicina, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Villaviciosa de Odón, Spain.
Judit Sánchez-GómezFacultad de Ciencias Biomédicas y de la Salud, Departamento de Medicina, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Villaviciosa de Odón, Spain.
Clara AzpeletaFacultad de Ciencias Biomédicas y de la Salud, Departamento de Medicina, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Villaviciosa de Odón, Spain.
Antonio S TutorFacultad de Medicina, Departamento de Ciencias Médicas Básicas, Universidad San Pablo-CEU, Madrid, Spain.
Marta LesmesFacultad de Ciencias Sociales y de la Comunicación, Departamento de Educación, Universidad Europea de Madrid, Villaviciosa de Odón, Spain.
Beatriz GalFacultad de Medicina, Departamento de Ciencias Médicas Básicas, Universidad San Pablo-CEU, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Medical curricula must provide students with basic and clinical competencies for critical reasoning and diagnosing. These competencies are better acquired when basic and clinical science are taught in an integrated and collaborative manner. In this study, we investigate whether supportive co-teaching (SCT) is an effective approach to promote integrated and reasoned learning as well as to help medical students applying theoretical concepts to clinical scenarios taught in a team-based learning (TBL) framework. Methods: We conducted a concurrent mixed methods study. For the qualitative part, we performed a focus group and semi-structured interviews to clinical and basic science teachers and medical students. Using conventional content analysis, themes were identified deductively. For the quantitative part, an analytical and descriptive observational study of the 2019-2020 cohort of first-year undergraduate medical students was conducted (107 students out of 220 completed the survey). For the descriptive study, questions were grouped into 5 categories. Results: Deductive themes from the analysis include relationship between clinical and basic science teachers, knowledge integration, methodology, teamwork and integrated Medicine and curricular design. Basic science and clinical teachers highlighted their relationship as critical to increase their mutual knowledge. This was supported by the student's opinion who very much valued their joint feedback. Regarding knowledge integration, both teachers and students found that horizontal and vertical integration enhanced applicability of basic knowledge to future clinical practice. The TBL methodology was very well perceived by both students and teachers and was highly motivating for students even though the need for commitment. Students considered that this program presented a great opportunity and expressed their interest in maintaining it in the future. These results were supported by the quantitative data. Conclusion: Our work supports the value of co-teaching in basic and clinical sciences within a TBL framework set in real clinical case scenarios. By employing this approach, students can actively apply their theoretical knowledge to clinical practice, enhancing their critical thinking, problem-solving, and clinical reasoning skills. Our findings can inform curriculum design and improved educational practice, leading to enhanced learning experiences for healthcare students and ultimately better patient care.

Indexed as

active methodologiesbasic and clinical science integrationmedicine studentssupportive co-teachingTBL

Identifiers

PMID39091291
PMCPMC11292953

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.