ArticleCureus2026
Impact of Team-Based Learning on the Clinical Reasoning and Critical Thinking Skills Among Undergraduate Medical Students.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Critical thinking and clinical reasoning are two core competencies essential for medical students in their evolution from passive learners to proficient future clinicians. These competencies require higher-order cognitive skills which cannot be accomplished through conventional lectures. In contemporary medical education, team-based learning (TBL) has emerged as an active innovative instructional strategy which promotes active participation, accountability, problem-solving, and higher-order thinking. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) assesses critical thinking, while the Script Concordance Test (SCT) measures clinical reasoning under uncertainty. The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of TBL in improving critical thinking and clinical reasoning among first-year MBBS students. Method An educational interventional study was conducted among 152 first-year MBBS students during a TBL session which included their pre-class preparation, Individual Readiness Assurance Test (IRAT), Team Readiness Assurance Test (TRAT), and application exercises with immediate facilitator feedback. To assess critical thinking, a 20-item questionnaire called the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CTAT) on adrenal cortex disorders was constructed based on the domains described in the CCTST. To measure clinical reasoning, a 30-item questionnaire was developed on the same topic based on SCT. The two questionnaires which were developed by the investigator and validated by an expert panel were used before and after the TBL session. Result A substantial improvement was observed in SCT (Cohen's d=0.89) in comparison to CTAT scores (Cohen's d=0.73) after the TBL session. The TBL intervention strengthened the relationship between clinical reasoning (SCT) and critical thinking (CTAT) transforming a weak correlation (r=0.163; p=0.045) into a moderate, statistically significant correlation (r=0.369; p<0.0001). Student performance increased progressively from IRAT (3.27±1.68) to TRAT (8.97±0.87) to application exercises (11.36±1.35) (p<0.0001). Conclusion The study indicates that the implementation of TBL sessions in the early stage of medical training of students can bridge the gap between basic science concepts and clinical applications enhancing both critical thinking and clinical reasoning.
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.