Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41547761›Full record

Trial reportBMC medical education2026

The Jigsaw teaching method compared to traditional teaching on anatomy and physiology knowledge in higher education - a randomised controlled trial.

Janette Moland Stokstad, Eirik Solberg Nedrehagen, Karl Ove Hufthammer

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Janette Moland Stokstad *Department of Welfare and Participation, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway. janette.moland.stokstad@hvl.no.
Eirik Solberg Nedrehagen *Department of Welfare and Participation, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Sogndal, Norway.
Karl Ove HufthammerDepartment of Welfare and Participation, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditional teaching (TT) is lecturer-centred, while student-centred teaching, including Jigsaw (JS), fosters student interaction. However, the results of research on the effectiveness of JS on learning outcomes is inconsistent. This randomised controlled trial compared the effect of JS and TT on higher-education students' knowledge of the anatomy and physiology of the sensory apparatus and on their perceptions of the two teaching methods.

methodsForty-eight undergraduate social nursing students were randomised to either a TT or JS-based learning activity. One JS student dropped out before completing the activity and was excluded, resulting in 47 participants (23 TT, 24 JS). Improvement in knowledge was assessed by recording the number of correct answers (points) on a 25-question multiple-choice test at three time points: before the activity (baseline), immediately after the activity (post-intervention) and at a three-month follow-up. Additionally, the students' perceptions were surveyed post-intervention using a questionnaire. Improvement in knowledge was analysed using a longitudinal model, and group differences in perceptions were analysed using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests.

resultsBoth groups significantly improved knowledge from baseline to post-intervention (TT: 5.2 points; JS: 4.6 points; p < 0.001 both groups) and from baseline to the three-month follow-up (TT: 3.8 points; JS: 3.3 points; p < 0.001 for both groups). No statistically significant differences in knowledge were observed between the groups (post-intervention difference: -0.5 points, 95% CI: -2.3 to 1.2, p = 0.54; three-month difference: -0.6 points, 95% CI: -2.4 to 1.2, p = 0.52). Overall, 91% improved from baseline to post-intervention, and 83% from baseline to three months. A higher proportion of TT students than JS students preferred their assigned teaching activity over others (78% vs. 38%, p = 0.002) or believed it would improve their grades (87% vs. 42%, p = 0.004). On the other hand, a lower proportion thought that it provided useful practice in oral presentation / communication (61% vs. 88%, p = 0.02).

conclusionsThis study found that both the Jigsaw method and traditional lectures effectively improve anatomy and physiology knowledge among students. Despite a student preference for traditional teaching, there were no significant differences in knowledge acquisition or retention between the two methods.

trial registrationClinical trial number not applicable.

Indexed as

AnatomyPhysiologyTeachingEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansMaleStudents, NursingAnatomy and physiology educationJigsaw teaching methodLearning outcomesStudent-centred learningStudent perceptions

Identifiers

PMID41547761
PMCPMC12895859

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.