Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40088096›Full record

ArticleBiochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

Combining face-to-face laboratory sessions and a computer simulation effectively teaches gene editing and DNA sequencing to undergraduate genetics students.

Chris Della Vedova, Gareth Denyer, Maurizio Costabile

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Combining face-to-face laboratory sessions and a computer simulation effectively teaches gene editing and DNA sequencing to undergraduate genetics students.Biochemistry and molecular biology education : a bimonthly publication of the International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
    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

3 authors.

Chris Della VedovaClinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2361-3729
Gareth DenyerSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1551-3936
Maurizio CostabileClinical and Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2162-6497

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Innovative approaches to teaching genetics are essential for improving student engagement and comprehension in this challenging field. Laboratory-based instruction enhances engagement with the subject while fostering the development of practical competencies and deepening comprehension of theoretical concepts. However, constraints on time and financial resources limit the feasibility of conducting extended laboratory sessions that incorporate cutting-edge genetic techniques. This study evaluated a hybrid teaching method that combined face-to-face (F-2-F) laboratory sessions with an online simulation to instruct undergraduates on gene editing and DNA sequencing. A Unity-based simulation was developed to complement traditional F-2-F laboratory sessions, allowing students to practice DNA sequencing techniques in a low-stakes environment. The simulation was integrated into a course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) focused on CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing in yeast. Student performance, engagement, and perceptions were assessed through laboratory assignments, access logs, and surveys. Students who engaged with the simulation prior to F-2-F sessions and those who engaged with the simulation over multiple days performed significantly better in assessments. Survey results indicated that most students found the simulation realistic and relevant and reported enhanced learning of DNA sequencing principles. Student confidence in DNA sequencing knowledge increased significantly after using the simulation. Student feedback highlighted benefits such as improved procedural understanding, stress reduction, and increased preparedness for F-2-F sessions. This approach addresses logistical challenges of traditional laboratory education while providing students with authentic, repeatable experiences in complex techniques. Our findings demonstrate the potential of integrating simulations with F-2-F instruction to enhance undergraduate education in genetics and molecular biology.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationGene EditingGeneticsLaboratoriesSequence Analysis, DNAStudentsCurriculumHumansUniversitiesCRISPRDNA sequencinggeneticshybrid teaching methodssimulation‐based learningundergraduate

Identifiers

PMID40088096
PMCPMC12087704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.