Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Comparative effectiveness of integrated video-based learning vs. conventional didactic lectures among Indian medical graduates: a multicentric study.
Trial report 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary exploration and evaluation of video-based feedback for orthokeratology lens fitting: a pilot study.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Effectiveness of blended learning versus conventional didactic teaching in pathology education outcomes.Bioinformation · 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
purposeThe medical field is rapidly evolving, requiring innovative teaching methodologies to enhance comprehension and retention among students. Integrated video-based learning (VBL), which combines audio-visual content with faculty-led discussions, aims to improve understanding through multi-sensory engagement. This study compares the effectiveness of integrated VBL with conventional didactic lectures in medical education. METHODOLOGY: This multicentric study was conducted across five medical institutions in India, involving 608 s-year MBBS students (Phase II) and 12 faculty members. Two topics, tuberculosis and biomedical waste management, were taught using a crossover design, with students randomly assigned to Group A (n = 304) and Group B (n = 304). Integrated VBL combined video content with interactive faculty-led sessions, while didactic lectures relied on traditional lecture-based teaching. Pre- and post-test assessments, using identical multiple-choice questions (MCQs), were conducted, and feedback was collected via a 1-5 Likert scale.
resultsFor tuberculosis, the mean pre-test score was 7.35 ± 1.74. Post-test scores were 13.10 ± 2.05 for Group A (integrated VBL) and 10.25 ± 1.84 for Group B (didactic). For biomedical waste management, the mean pre-test score was 6.31 ± 1.39, with post-test scores of 12.59 ± 2.33 for Group B (integrated VBL) and 8.50 ± 1.67 for Group A (didactic). Over 60% of students reported that integrated VBL improved understanding, retention, and self-directed learning. Faculty feedback corroborated these findings, though they noted increased workload.
conclusionIntegrated VBL significantly outperformed conventional didactic teaching, as evidenced by higher post-test scores and positive feedback. Neither VBL nor didactic teaching alone is optimal; however, their integration leverages visual-aural engagement and faculty guidance to enhance comprehension and retention. This approach is a vital component of modern medical education, fostering deeper understanding and clinical correlation.
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.