Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-11-91
DC FieldValue
dc.titleA controlled study of team-based learning for undergraduate clinical neurology education
dc.contributor.authorTan, N.C.
dc.contributor.authorKandiah, N.
dc.contributor.authorChan, Y.
dc.contributor.authorUmapathi, T.
dc.contributor.authorLee, S.
dc.contributor.authorTan, K.
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-04T06:37:14Z
dc.date.available2020-09-04T06:37:14Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.citationTan, N.C., Kandiah, N., Chan, Y., Umapathi, T., Lee, S., Tan, K. (2011). A controlled study of team-based learning for undergraduate clinical neurology education. BMC Medical Education 11 (1) : 91. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-11-91
dc.identifier.issn14726920
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/174455
dc.description.abstractBackground: Team-based learning (TBL), a new active learning method, has not been reported for neurology education. We aimed to determine if TBL was more effective than passive learning (PL) in improving knowledge outcomes in two key neurology topics - neurological localization and neurological emergencies. Methods. We conducted a modified crossover study during a nine-week internal medicine posting involving 49 third-year medical undergraduates, using TBL as the active intervention, compared against self-reading as a PL control, for teaching the two topics. Primary outcome was the mean percentage change in test scores immediately after (post-test 1) and 48 hours after TBL (post-test 2), compared to a baseline pre-test. Student engagement was the secondary outcome. Results: Mean percentage change in scores was greater in the TBL versus the PL group in post-test 1 (8.8% vs 4.3%, p = 0.023) and post-test 2 (11.4% vs 3.4%, p = 0.001). After adjustment for gender and second year examination grades, mean percentage change in scores remained greater in the TBL versus the PL group for post-test 1 (10.3% vs 5.8%, mean difference 4.5%,95% CI 0.7 - 8.3%, p = 0.021) and post-test 2 (13.0% vs 4.9%, mean difference 8.1%,95% CI 3.7 - 12.5%, p = 0.001), indicating further score improvement 48 hours post-TBL. Academically weaker students, identified by poorer examination grades, showed a greater increase in scores with TBL versus strong students (p < 0.02). Measures of engagement were high in the TBL group, suggesting that continued improvements in scores 48 hours post-TBL may result from self-directed learning. Conclusions: Compared to PL, TBL showed greater improvement in knowledge scores, with continued improvement up to 48 hours later. This effect is larger in academically weaker students. TBL is an effective method for improving knowledge in neurological localization and neurological emergencies in undergraduates. © 2011 Tan et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltd.
dc.sourceUnpaywall 20200831
dc.subjectadult
dc.subjectanalysis of variance
dc.subjectarticle
dc.subjectcrossover procedure
dc.subjecteducation
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjectgroup process
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectmedical education
dc.subjectmethodology
dc.subjectneurology
dc.subjectnonparametric test
dc.subjectorganization and management
dc.subjectproblem based learning
dc.subjectstatistics
dc.subjectAnalysis of Variance
dc.subjectCross-Over Studies
dc.subjectEducation, Medical, Undergraduate
dc.subjectEducational Measurement
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectGroup Processes
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectNeurology
dc.subjectProblem-Based Learning
dc.subjectStatistics, Nonparametric
dc.subjectYoung Adult
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentDUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL
dc.description.doi10.1186/1472-6920-11-91
dc.description.sourcetitleBMC Medical Education
dc.description.volume11
dc.description.issue1
dc.description.page91
dc.published.statePublished
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1186_1472-6920-11-91.pdf490.52 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

59
checked on Jun 21, 2022

Page view(s)

148
checked on Jun 23, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.