Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41073985›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2025

Medical students' evaluation of digital problem-based learning: a mixed-methods systematic review.

Camilla Rams Rathleff, John Vergel, Thomas Ryberg, Jette Kolding Kristensen, Patrik Kjaersdam Telléus

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. 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

5 authors.

Camilla Rams RathleffDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Institute for Advanced Study in PBL, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark. crr@hst.aau.dk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-8163-3590
John VergelSchool of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universidad del Rosario , Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8855-0327
Thomas RybergInstitute for Advanced Study in PBL, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1049-8239
Jette Kolding KristensenDepartment of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2648-5750
Patrik Kjaersdam TelléusDepartment of Health Science and Technology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9318-8086

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital Problem-Based Learning (DPBL) is becoming more frequently used to facilitate the development of knowledge and skills in medical education, yet student satisfaction and engagement with DPBL remain insufficiently understood.

methodsThis mixed-methods systematic review aimed to examine how medical students perceive and experience DPBL. We searched four databases (Feb 5-Jun 30, 2024) following JBI and PRISMA guidelines, yielding 3459 abstracts and 56 included studies. Studies published at any time and in any language were considered. Two researchers independently conducted screening, selection, quality assessment and analysis. A segregated approach was used to synthesize the data. This method included a thematic synthesis of the qualitative data and a narrative review/meta-analysis for quantitative data where appropriate. The findings of both syntheses were then integrated and validated by stakeholders.

resultsThe mixed-methods synthesis demonstrated that both quantitative and qualitative findings complemented each other, offering a comprehensive understanding of medical students' perceptions of DPBL. Overall, students had a positive evaluation of DPBL, despite some mixed perceptions. Quantitatively, the satisfaction rate was 78.51% (95% CI: 78.07% - 78.96%) across 20 studies. Qualitatively, students' social perceptions varied, with some feeling isolated and others valued the focused learning environment. DPBL tasks provided ownership, autonomy, and flexibility. Technology was useful, engaging, and motivational, though feedback was occasionally lacking. Visual and auditory features were appreciated, but tactile realism was limited. The study findings were validated by 10 medical students.

conclusionsOur findings suggest that DPBL design still struggles to reconcile technological innovation with the social principles of traditional PBL. A hybrid model may offer a practical way to bridge this gap.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateProblem-Based LearningStudents, MedicalEducation, MedicalHumansDigital problem-based learningMedical educationStudent perspectives

Identifiers

PMID41073985
PMCPMC12512476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.