Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of team-, case-, lecture-, and evidence-based learning (TCLEBL) methods in cultivating students’ clinical and research abilities, as compared to traditional lecture-based learning (LBL) approaches. Methods Forty-one medical postgraduates were divided into two groups, a TCLEBL group and an LBL group. Teaching effectiveness was evaluated through student- and teacher-feedback questionnaires, scores from theoretical examinations and written literature reviews, and student learning burdens. Results Compared to the LBL approach, both teachers and students were more satisfied with the TCLEBL model ( p < 0.001 for both teachers and students). The TCLEBL group performed significantly higher on the theory test compared to the LBL group ( p = 0.009). There were significant differences between the LBL and TCLEBL groups, respectively, in terms of literature review and citations (12.683 ± 2.207 vs. 16.302 ± 1.095, p < 0.001), argument and perspective (12.55 ± 1.572 vs. 16.333 ± 1.354, p < 0.001), comprehensiveness of content (13.3 ± 2.268 vs. 16.683 ± 1.344, p < 0.001), and scientific rigor and accuracy (10.317 ± 1.167 vs. 12.746 ± 0.706, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the total extracurricular time expended between the two groups (323.75 ± 30.987 min vs. 322.619 ± 24.679 min, respectively for LBL vs. TCLEBL groups, p = 0.898). Conclusions TCLEBL is an effective teaching method that cultivates students’ clinical and research abilities.
Huang et al. (Tue,) studied this question.