Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42005374›Full record

ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2026

Comparison of progress test performance between PBL and TBL curricula.

Ahmad S Alamro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 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

1 author.

Ahmad S AlamroDepartment of Medical Education, College of Medicine, Qassim University, KSA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Problem-based learning (PBL) and team-based learning (TBL) are two widely implemented educational strategies in medical education. Although both are aimed at enhancing student engagement and clinical reasoning, limited research has compared their long-term outcomes by using curriculum-independent measures such as progress testing. Methods: This retrospective comparative study examined progress test performance among medical students enrolled in PBL vs. TBL tracks at the same university. From de-identified data, student scores were analyzed across five academic years, stratified by gender, discipline, body system, dimension of care, and physician activity. Results: TBL students scored higher in early years, whereas PBL students showed a steeper knowledge trajectory and outperformed their TBL peers in senior years. The PBL students consistently achieved higher scores across most disciplines, organ systems, and care dimensions, particularly in chronic care, preventive care, diagnosis, and psychosocial domains. Analysis by gender indicated slightly higher performance among women than men in both tracks. Conclusion: Curricular structure critically shapes students' patterns of knowledge acquisition. The findings suggested that PBL and TBL support learning in different ways across the curriculum, with each demonstrating strengths at different stages of student progression. These results highlight the potential value of designing blended curricula drawing on the complementary features of both approaches to optimize medical education outcomes.

Indexed as

Problem-based learningProgress testStudent performanceTeam-based learning

Identifiers

PMID42005374
PMCPMC13091100

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.