Department of orthopaedics, Affiliated Hospital of Guangdong Medical University, Zhanjiang, PR China.
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Feb 22;24(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05107-9.
Recently, there has been a concerted effort within medical schools to depart from conventional lecture-based learning approaches to alternative teaching methods such as team-based learning (TBL) and problem-based learning (PBL), with the aim of enhancing both student engagement and instructional efficacy. Despite this shift, a comprehensive review that directly compares the impacts of PBL and TBL methods in medical education is lacking. This study seeks to address this gap by conducting a meta-analysis that compares the effects of TBL and PBL in the context of medical education.
Studies from Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chinese Wanfang Database were searched, from inception to July 11, 2023. A meta-analysis was performed using Stata 14.0, and a total of 10 studies (including 752 participants) were included. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to estimate pooled effects. Heterogeneity was detected using the I2 statistic and further explored using meta-regression analysis.
Compared with PBL, TBL significantly increased the number of theoretical tests (SMD = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.02-0.73). Additionally, TBL greatly improved teamwork skills compared with PBL. However, there were no significant differences between the TBL and PBL groups concerning practical skill scores, learning interest, or understanding skills.
TBL in the theoretical aspects of medical education appears to be more effective than PBL in improving theoretical test scores and teamwork skills, providing evidence for the implementation of TBL in medical education.
最近,医学院校一直在努力摆脱传统的基于讲座的学习方法,采用团队学习(TBL)和基于问题的学习(PBL)等替代教学方法,旨在提高学生的参与度和教学效果。尽管发生了这种转变,但缺乏对 PBL 和 TBL 方法在医学教育中影响的全面综述。本研究旨在通过进行荟萃分析来解决这一差距,该分析比较了 TBL 和 PBL 在医学教育中的效果。
从 Embase、PubMed、Web of Science、中国国家知识基础设施和中国万方数据库中搜索了从成立到 2023 年 7 月 11 日的研究。使用 Stata 14.0 进行荟萃分析,共纳入 10 项研究(包括 752 名参与者)。使用标准化均数差(SMD)来估计合并效应。使用 I2 统计量检测异质性,并进一步通过荟萃回归分析进行探索。
与 PBL 相比,TBL 显著增加了理论测试的数量(SMD=0.37,95%CI:0.02-0.73)。此外,与 PBL 相比,TBL 极大地提高了团队合作技能。然而,在实践技能分数、学习兴趣或理解技能方面,TBL 组和 PBL 组之间没有显著差异。
TBL 在医学教育的理论方面似乎比 PBL 更有效,能够提高理论测试分数和团队合作技能,为在医学教育中实施 TBL 提供了证据。