BACKGROUND: The precise effect and the quality of different cases used in dermatology problem-based learning (PBL) curricula are yet unclear. AIM: To prospectively compare the impact of real patients, digital, paper PBL (PPBL) and traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) on academic results and student perceptions. METHODS:A total of 120 students were randomly allocated into either real-patients PBL (RPBL) group studied via real-patient cases, digital PBL (DPBL) group studied via digital-form cases, PPBL group studied via paper-form cases, or conventional group who received didactic lectures. Academic results were assessed through review of written examination, objective structured clinical examination and student performance scores. A five-point Likert scale questionnaire was used to evaluate student perceptions. RESULTS: Compared to those receiving lectures only, all PBL participants had better results for written examination, clinical examination and overall performance. Students in RPBL group exhibited better overall performance than those in the other two PBL groups. Real-patient cases were more effective in helping develop students' self-directed learning skills, improving their confidence in future patient encounters and encouraging them to learn more about the discussed condition, compared to digital and paper cases. CONCLUSION: Both real patient and digital triggers are helpful in improving students' clinical problem-handling skills. However, real patients provide greater benefits to students.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The precise effect and the quality of different cases used in dermatology problem-based learning (PBL) curricula are yet unclear. AIM: To prospectively compare the impact of real patients, digital, paper PBL (PPBL) and traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) on academic results and student perceptions. METHODS: A total of 120 students were randomly allocated into either real-patients PBL (RPBL) group studied via real-patient cases, digital PBL (DPBL) group studied via digital-form cases, PPBL group studied via paper-form cases, or conventional group who received didactic lectures. Academic results were assessed through review of written examination, objective structured clinical examination and student performance scores. A five-point Likert scale questionnaire was used to evaluate student perceptions. RESULTS: Compared to those receiving lectures only, all PBL participants had better results for written examination, clinical examination and overall performance. Students in RPBL group exhibited better overall performance than those in the other two PBL groups. Real-patient cases were more effective in helping develop students' self-directed learning skills, improving their confidence in future patient encounters and encouraging them to learn more about the discussed condition, compared to digital and paper cases. CONCLUSION: Both real patient and digital triggers are helpful in improving students' clinical problem-handling skills. However, real patients provide greater benefits to students.
Authors: Jelle Tichelaar; Coen van Kan; Robert J van Unen; Anton J Schneider; Michiel A van Agtmael; Theo P G M de Vries; Milan C Richir Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Lorainne Tudor Car; Bhone Myint Kyaw; Gerard Dunleavy; Neil A Smart; Monika Semwal; Jerome I Rotgans; Naomi Low-Beer; James Campbell Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2019-02-28 Impact factor: 5.428