Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39934738›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

Enhancing clinical reasoning skills in medical students through team-based learning: a mixed-methods study.

Kosuke Ishizuka, Kiyoshi Shikino, Naoko Takada, Yohei Sakai, Yasushi Ototake, Takashi Kobayashi, Tetsuhiko Inoue, Ryosuke Jikuya, Yuri Iwata, Kenichi Nishimura and 13 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Development and Evaluation of a Clinical Reasoning Case for Second-Year Medical Students.MedEdPORTAL : the journal of teaching and learning resources · 2026
    Article
  11. 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

23 authors.

Kosuke IshizukaDepartment of General Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama-city, Kanagawa pref, Japan. e103007c@yokohama-cu.ac.jp.
Kiyoshi ShikinoDepartment of General Medicine, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
Naoko TakadaDepartment of General Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama-city, Kanagawa pref, Japan.
Yohei SakaiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yasushi OtotakeDepartment of Environmental Immuno-Dermatology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Takashi KobayashiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Tetsuhiko InoueDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Ryosuke JikuyaDepartment of Urology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yuri IwataDepartment of Gastroenterology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kenichi NishimuraDepartment of Pediatrics, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Ryusuke YoshimiDepartment of Hematology and Clinical Immunology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yasufumi OiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yuko WatanabeDepartment of Environmental Immuno-Dermatology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yu TogashiDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Fumihiro OgawaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Daisuke SanoDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Takeshi AsamiDepartment of Psychiatry, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Yuichi ImaiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Ichiro TakeuchiDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Kengo FunakoshiDepartment of Neuroanatomy, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Mitsuyasu OhtaDepartment of General Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama-city, Kanagawa pref, Japan.
Masahiko InamoriDepartment of Medical Education, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan.
Akihiko KusakabeDepartment of General Medicine, Yokohama City University School of Medicine, 3-9 Fukuura, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama-city, Kanagawa pref, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical reasoning skills are essential competencies for medical students; therefore, effective, evidence-informed teaching methodologies are needed worldwide. This study investigated the benefits of team-based learning (TBL) for developing the skills in medical students.

methodA mixed-methods sequential explanatory design was used to investigate the effectiveness of TBL for medical students acquiring clinical reasoning skills. The study participants comprised 92 fourth-year medical students at Yokohama City University School of Medicine, participating in TBL sessions that covered 10 major clinical symptoms identified in the core curriculum. Each session lasted 240 min. Before and after the educational intervention, student performance was measured using the script concordance test (SCT) on a 30-point scale, and self-assessed clinical reasoning competency was measured on a 7-point Likert scale. The SCT included pre-tests and post-tests of 30 questions each, with students randomly assigned to one of two test sets. Following the quantitative evaluation, a qualitative content analysis was conducted to explore the advantages of TBL for learning clinical reasoning skills. The analytic categories were set according to the six levels of Fink's taxonomy of significant learning.

resultStudent performance improved significantly after the educational intervention (A test: 16.5 ± 4.4 to 18.7 ± 4.5, p = 0.019; B test: 18.1 ± 3.7 to 19.8 ± 4.4, p = 0.028). After the educational intervention, self-assessed clinical reasoning competency was significantly higher in "recalling appropriate physical examination and tests on clinical hypothesis generation," "recalling appropriate differential diagnosis from patient's chief complaint," "verbalizing points that fit/don't fit the recalled differential diagnosis appropriately," "verbalizing and reflecting appropriately on own mistakes," "selecting keywords from the whole aspect of the patient," and "practicing the appropriate clinical reasoning process" (all p < 0.001). The content analysis extracted 23 subcategories and 233 codes of the advantages of TBL for learning clinical reasoning skills, covering all six levels of Fink's taxonomy of significant learning: Foundational knowledge (7 codes); Application (40 codes); Integration (69 codes); Human dimension (89 codes); Caring (8 codes); and Learning how to learn (20 codes).

conclusionThis study demonstrates that TBL supports the acquisition of critical clinical reasoning skills among medical students.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceClinical ReasoningEducation, Medical, UndergraduateProblem-Based LearningStudents, MedicalCurriculumEducational MeasurementFemaleGroup ProcessesHumansJapanMaleYoung AdultClinical reasoningFink’s taxonomyScript concordance testTeam-based learning

Identifiers

PMID39934738
PMCPMC11817391

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.