ArticleBMC medical education2025
Comparative study of the effect of two small group discussion teaching methods (Tutorial vs Jigsaw) on academic motivation and achievement of undergraduate dental students - a preliminary study.
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 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.
- Comparison of the effects of role-playing, small group discussion, and traditional teaching methods on nursing students' self-efficacy.BMC medical education · 2025Trial
- Effect of Jigsaw Cooperative Learning on Short-Term Academic Performance and Engagement Compared to Tutorials Among MBBS Students: A Quasiexperimental Study.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Hybrid Case-Based Learning and Small-Group Teaching Model Using Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Case Generation: An Innovative Dental Education Study.Advances in medical education and practice · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcademic Motivation forces students to work harder to achieve their educational goals and increases their academic achievement. Teaching methodologies are one of the ways to cater learning needs of students and improve academic motivation. However, there is a paucity of literature comparing the two small group discussion methods for their effect on academic motivation and the academic achievement. This study aims to analyze which small group discussion teaching method (between jigsaw and tutorial) is more effective in improving the academic motivation and achievement of undergraduate dental students. .
methodsThis experimental study was conducted at Shifa College of Dentistry, randomly sampling the BDS 1
resultsThe data of 46 students was included in the study (22 students in the Tutorial Group and 24 in the Jigsaw group). The mean pre-test scores of the academic achievement test for the control (tutorial) group was 16.86 ± 2.997 and for the experimental (jigsaw) group was 16.58 ± 3.296 (p-value=0.765). The mean post-test scores were 17.32 ± 3.859 and 19.50 ± 3.162 for the control and experimental group respectively (p-value=0.041). The control group and the experimental group had mean academic motivation scores of 56.05 ± 15.32 and 59.83 ± 10.09 respectively, before the intervention (p-value=0.324). Post intervention, the two groups had mean academic motivation scores of 57.66 ± 11.87(control group) and 72.17 ± 12.42 (experimental group). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean scores on the academic motivation scale (p value=0.000) between the two groups after intervention.
conclusionThe jigsaw method is more effective in improving academic motivation and achievement of undergraduate dental students.
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.