ArticleBMC medical education2025
The application of the conceive-design-implement-operate combined with the problem-based-learning teaching method in an 8-year rotation system for obstetrics students in China.
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 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis pilot study aimed to assess the effectiveness of conceive-design-implement-operate (CDIO) combined with the problem-based learning (PBL) teaching method in obstetrics students of an eight-year rotation system, focusing on clinical theory and practical skills at Peking Union Medical College Hospital in China.
methodsThis prospective study enrolled eight-year medical students with no prior obstetrics experience between September 2021 and April 2022. Participants were assigned to either the CDIO-PBL teaching group or the traditional teaching group. The mastery of theoretical knowledge was evaluated using a self-assessment questionnaire, while clinical skills were assessed through Direct Observation of Procedural Skills (DOPS). Statistical analyses, including t-tests, Mann-Whitney U tests, and chi-square tests, were conducted to compare the proficiency in theoretical knowledge and clinical skills between the two groups.
resultsA total of 91 students participated in the assessment of theoretical knowledge competency, with 49 assigned to the PBL + CDIO group and 42 to the traditional learning group. For the procedural skills evaluation, 55 students were enrolled, including 30 from the intervention group and 25 from the control group. No significant differences were observed in the demographic characteristics between the two groups. Regarding theoretical learning, the PBL method significantly increased the proportion of students who rated their experience as "agree" or "totally agree," rising from 68.5 to 92.2% (P < 0.001). Additionally, the CDIO teaching method demonstrated a significant improvement in obstetric procedural skills, with P < 0.001 across all evaluation criteria.
conclusionThe combination of CDIO and PBL is an effective and satisfactory methodology for obstetric teaching, including theoretical learning and clinical skills.
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.