Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41039339›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2025

The cost-analysis of Team-Based Learning versus small group interactive learning in undergraduate medical education.

Irene Sterpu, Lotta Herling, Anna Möller, Helena Kopp Kallner, Hedvig Engberg, Jonas Nordquist, Ganesh Acharya

Abstract readComparative Study
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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
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

7 authors.

Irene SterpuDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. irene.sterpu@ki.se.
Lotta HerlingDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anna MöllerDepartment of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Helena Kopp KallnerDepartment of Clinical Sciences Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Hedvig EngbergDepartment of Women's and Children's Health, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jonas NordquistDepartment of Medicine (Huddinge), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Ganesh AcharyaDivision of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Clinical Sciences, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe financial resources for medical education are limited. Since every pedagogical intervention uses these resources, it is important to prioritize interventions that generate the most educational gains. Applying cost-analysis in education helps align financial resources with educational goals. Team-based learning (TBL) and small group interactive learning (SIL) are two active teaching/learning methods widely used in medical education. We have previously shown that their outcomes are comparable regarding students' knowledge acquisition, satisfaction and engagement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the costs of delivering TBL versus SIL to undergraduate medical students.

methodThe implementation costs and recurring costs of delivering TBL and SIL to 157 medical students attending clinical seminars in the obstetrics and gynecology course at Karolinska Institutet were evaluated. A cost minimization analysis was performed where the implementation costs and the recurring costs of delivering TBL and SIL were calculated and compared.

resultsThe implementation costs of delivering TBL were 126 USD/student, with teacher salaries accounting for 50% of the total costs. The recurring costs of delivering TBL and SIL were 74 USD/student and 31 USD/student, respectively. The sensitivity analysis for TBL showed that with analog aids and a student: teacher ratio of 80:1, the costs would be 10 USD/student.

conclusionTBL was more costly than SIL in our setting, primarily due to the implementation expenses incurred for faculty training during the initial phase of this newly introduced teaching method and the costs of using an electronic platform. However, the sensitivity analysis indicated that adopting analog tools and increasing the student: teacher ratio could significantly reduce TBL costs, making it more comparable to SIL.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateGroup ProcessesProblem-Based LearningCosts and Cost AnalysisGynecologyHumansObstetricsStudents, MedicalActive learningactive learning cost-efectiveness.cost-analysisCost-analysisCost-efectivenessteam-based learningTeam-based learning

Identifiers

PMID41039339
PMCPMC12490028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.