Department of Military Cognitive Psychology, School of Psychology, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing 40038, China.
Battalion 2022 of the Cadet Brigade, Third Military Medical University (Army Medical University), Chongqing 40038, China.
BMJ Open. 2024 Jan 30;14(1):e079716. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079716.
Mounting evidence has suggested that novel teaching strategies have a positive impact on the quality and efficiency of medical education. However, the comprehensive evidence about the superiority among various strategies is not clear. To address this issue, we aim to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) to evaluate the effects of six main strategies on medical education, including case-based learning, problem-based learning, team-based learning, flipped classrooms, simulation-based education and bridge-in, objective, preassessment, participatory learning, postassessment and summary.
A systematic search will be conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library, covering studies published from database inception to November 2023. Randomised controlled trials which evaluated the different teaching methods and meet the eligibility criteria will be included. The effectiveness of medical students' learning, which is evaluated by theoretical test score, experimental or practical test score, will be analysed as the primary outcomes. Besides, the secondary outcomes consist of learning satisfaction of students and formative evaluation score. The study selection and data extraction will be independently performed by two authors. The risk of bias in each study will be assessed using V.2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised controlled trials. To compare the effects of six teaching strategies, pairwise meta-analysis and NMA will be performed using Rev Man, STATA and R software. Statistical analyses including homogeneity tests, sensitivity analysis, consistency tests, subgroup analysis, Egger's test and publication bias will also be completed.
No formal research ethics approval is required because this study is a meta-analysis based on published studies. The results will be disseminated to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.
CRD42023456050.
越来越多的证据表明，新的教学策略对医学教育的质量和效率有积极影响。然而，各种策略之间优势的综合证据尚不清楚。为了解决这个问题，我们旨在进行系统评价和网络荟萃分析（NMA），以评估六种主要策略对医学教育的影响，包括基于案例的学习、基于问题的学习、团队学习、翻转课堂、基于模拟的教育和桥梁式、客观式、预评估式、参与式学习、后评估式和总结式。
将在 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Library 中进行系统检索，涵盖从数据库建立到 2023 年 11 月发表的研究。将纳入评估不同教学方法且符合入选标准的随机对照试验。将学生学习的效果，通过理论考试成绩、实验或实践考试成绩进行分析，作为主要结局。此外，学生的学习满意度和形成性评价分数作为次要结局。研究选择和数据提取将由两位作者独立进行。使用 Cochrane 随机对照试验偏倚风险工具 V.2 评估每个研究的偏倚风险。为了比较六种教学策略的效果，将使用 Rev Man、STATA 和 R 软件进行两两荟萃分析和 NMA。还将完成包括同质性检验、敏感性分析、一致性检验、亚组分析、Egger 检验和发表偏倚在内的统计分析。
由于本研究是基于已发表研究的荟萃分析，因此不需要正式的研究伦理批准。研究结果将发表在同行评议的期刊上。
CRD42023456050。
