Jordan Jaime, Missaghi Babak, Douglass Amy, Tolles Juliana
Department of Emergency Medicine Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center Los Angeles CA USA.
David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA Los Angeles CA USA.
AEM Educ Train. 2020 May 21;5(2):e10464. doi: 10.1002/aet2.10464. eCollection 2021 Apr.
Active learning techniques help with motivation, involvement, and retention during didactics. There are few studies comparing different active learning methods, and these have yielded mixed results. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of two active learning methods-small-group discussion and audience response system (ARS)-on immediate- and long-term knowledge gain.
This was a prospective experimental study of emergency medicine (EM) subinterns and residents. Participants were randomized into two groups, and baseline knowledge was assessed with a multiple-choice pretest. Didactic sessions on salicylate toxicity and ocular trauma were given to both groups utilizing either small-group discussion or ARS. A crossover design was utilized to ensure that both groups received instruction by each method. A multiple-choice posttest was administered following the didactics and again 2 months later. Pre- and posttests were identical. All test items were written by an academic faculty member with advanced training in medical education and item writing and were based on the goals and objectives of the session. Test items were piloted with a reference group of learners. Didactic instructors were blinded to test items. Data were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model.
Thirty-eight subinterns and residents participated in the study. Both instructional methods showed immediate- and long-term knowledge gain. The linear mixed-effects model did not demonstrate any significant difference between instructional methods on immediate knowledge gain (mean difference = 0.18, p = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.52 to 0.88) or long-term knowledge gain (mean difference = -0.42, p = 0.36, 95% CI = -1.32 to 0.47).
In this small study, there was no significant difference between instructional methods on immediate- and long-term knowledge gain in EM subinterns and residents.
主动学习技术有助于在教学过程中激发积极性、提高参与度并增强记忆。比较不同主动学习方法的研究较少，且结果不一。本研究的目的是比较两种主动学习方法——小组讨论和观众反应系统（ARS）——对即时和长期知识获取的影响。
这是一项针对急诊医学（EM）实习医生和住院医生的前瞻性实验研究。参与者被随机分为两组，通过多项选择题预测试评估基线知识。两组均采用小组讨论或ARS的方式接受关于水杨酸盐中毒和眼外伤的教学课程。采用交叉设计以确保两组都接受每种方法的教学。教学课程结束后以及2个月后分别进行多项选择题后测试。前后测试相同。所有测试项目均由一位在医学教育和项目编写方面接受过高级培训的学术教员编写，且基于课程的目标和目的。测试项目在一组参考学习者中进行了预试验。教学教员对测试项目不知情。使用线性混合效应模型分析数据。
38名实习医生和住院医生参与了该研究。两种教学方法均显示出即时和长期的知识获取。线性混合效应模型未显示教学方法在即时知识获取（平均差异 = 0.18，p = 0.62，95%置信区间[CI] = -0.52至0.88）或长期知识获取（平均差异 = -0.42，p = 0.36，95% CI = -1.32至0.47）方面存在任何显著差异。
在这项小型研究中，对于EM实习医生和住院医生，两种教学方法在即时和长期知识获取方面没有显著差异。
