Trial reportThe clinical teacher2025
Comparison of Online Peer-Assisted Learning and Faculty-Led Teaching for Short Answer Questions.
Trial report in The clinical teacher, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synergising flipped classroom and case-based learning in resource-intensive anatomy education in China: a quasi-experimental study.BMJ open · 2025Trial
- Enhancing cardiopulmonary physiotherapy education with an AI-driven Smart Learning Platform: a quasi-experimental study.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- The association between online learning environments and academic emotions in medical education: a controlled value theory perspective.BMC medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPeer-assisted learning (PAL) is a well-recognised pedagogical approach in medical education; however, research on its effectiveness in online settings remains limited. Multiple-choice questions have been the predominant method for assessing PAL outcomes, despite Short Answer Questions (SAQs) being the superior tool for evaluating knowledge. This study compares online peer and faculty teaching in enhancing medical students' higher-order thinking skills and assesses students' perceptions of these methods.
methodsThird-year medical students undergoing surgical placements were consented and recruited for the study. Three pre-defined cohorts were randomised to the following arms: no intervention (n = 41), online PAL teaching (n = 37) and online faculty teaching (n = 35). Peer teaching was delivered by fourth-year students (n = 6) and faculty teaching by Clinical Teaching Fellows (CTFs) (n = 6). Academic outcomes were assessed using end-of-block SAQ formatives, and teaching quality was evaluated using the validated SEEQ questionnaire. Knowledge gain and self-perceived confidence were assessed through pre- and post-session tests, validated with a reference group of learners.
resultsConsent for SAQ exam scores was obtained from n = 19 (no intervention), n = 29 (PAL) and n = 21 (CTF). No significant differences were seen between the groups (p = 0.650). SEEQ completion was n = 24 (PAL) and n = 30 (CTF). CTF tutors received significantly higher ratings in domains of Learning (p = 0.017) and Group Interaction (p = 0.036). Pre- and post-session tests showed no significant differences in scores (p = 0.957) or self-perceived confidence ratings (p = 0.454).
conclusionThis study shows that online PAL is a viable alternative to faculty-led teaching for enhancing SAQ skills and knowledge acquisition. However, faculty-led teaching offers a superior educational experience.
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.