ArticleInternational journal of applied & basic medical research
Comparative Study on Giving Feedback to MBBS Students by Two Different Techniques in Biochemistry in a Medical College in North India.
Article in International journal of applied & basic medical research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Delivering feedback to students who have just joined a new course is relevant for it may help them to understand their subject better and hence enhance their performance. Aim: The present study aimed to provide feedback to students using two different techniques: the sandwich method and the Ask-Tell-Ask method. It also evaluated students' perceptions of the feedback and assessed the quality of the feedback provided. Materials and Methods: The present study was a prospective randomized study conducted in the department of biochemistry with 1 Results: The difference in midterm marks obtained by students of the group which was provided feedback individually compared to the other group which received collective feedback was statistically significant ( Conclusions: The study found that providing individual feedback increased the mean marks of students with no statistical difference in the mean increment of marks based on which faculty member provided the feedback. The students perceived the feedback as relevant, timely (provided within 2 weeks of the test), and related to their performance. They felt that the culture of delivering feedback should be made an institutional norm.
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.