Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39736639›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2024

Comparison of the effects of different teaching methods on the effectiveness of teaching neurology in China: a bayesian network meta-analysis and systematic review.

Xiangyu Li, Longsheng Zhang, Wenjun Sun, Min Lei, Ying Li, Jiacheng Zhang, Xing Huang

Abstract readSystematic ReviewComparative StudyNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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.

Xiangyu LiDepartment of Neurology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China.
Longsheng ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China.
Wenjun SunDepartment of Neurology, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Third Affiliated Hospital, Beijing, 100029, China.
Min LeiDepartment of Neurology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China.
Ying LiDepartment of Neurology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China.
Jiacheng ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Dongzhimen Hospital, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, 100700, China. 13426324787@163.com.
Xing HuangDepartment of Neurology, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Third Affiliated Hospital, Beijing, 100029, China. huangxing52071@163.com.

Funding

Central University Basic Research Fund of China 2022-JYB-XJSJJ-093Key Technologies Research and Development Program 2018YFC1705001Tongzhou district health development research fund KJ2023CX064Wu Jieping Medical Foundation 320.6750.2022-25-13
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn China, investigations into the efficacy of neurological clinical teaching try to ascertain the impacts of various teaching methods on intervention outcomes. However, these studies often suffer from limited sample sizes, single-center studies and low quality, compounded by the lack of direct comparative analyses between teaching methods, thereby leaving the identification of the most effective method unresolved. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of various teaching methods in the standardized training of Chinese neurology clinicians to inform an optimal teaching model utilizing a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) approach.

methodsA comprehensive computer search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of 7 teaching methods: problem-based learning (PBL), case-based learning (CBL), flipped classroom model (FCM), evidence-based medicine (EBM), clinical practice (CP), team-based learning (TBL), and lecture-based learning (LBL). The search, which spanned databases including the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Citation Database (CDD), China Science Periodical Database (CSPD), Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, covered the period from the inception of these databases to April 1, 2023. The quality of the included studies was evaluated, and the data were analyzed in R 4.3.2 and Stata 17.0 software.

resultsFrom the 31 studies included, comprising 2124 subjects, significant findings emerged. In theoretical examinations, a statistically significant difference was noted among the teaching methods, with CBL, PBL, TBL, FCM, and EBM showing superior performance over the LBL method. The effectiveness ranking of these methods was as follows: CBL > PBL > TBL > FCM > EBM > CP > LBL. In terms of practical skills examinations, a similar pattern of effectiveness was observed. Here, the order of effectiveness was CBL > EBM > PBL > TBL > FCM > CP > LBL.

conclusionsThis NMA indicated that the modern teaching pedagogies, particularly CBL, could be effective in neurology education, and might help improve the theoretical examinations and practical skills of neurology clinicians. Fully tapping into the strengths of modern teaching methods in neurology teaching will require additional work and advancing research.

Indexed as

Bayes TheoremNeurologyTeachingChinaEducation, MedicalHumansProblem-Based LearningBayesian network meta-analysis (NMA)EducationNeurology: teaching methodTeaching effectiveness

Identifiers

PMID39736639
PMCPMC11687189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.