IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0120884.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Effectiveness of the Problem-Based Learning Teaching Model for Use in Introductory Chinese Undergraduate Medical Courses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yanqi Zhang
  • Liang Zhou
  • Xiaoyu Liu
  • Ling Liu
  • Yazhou Wu
  • Zengwei Zhao
  • Dali Yi
  • Dong Yi

Abstract

Background: Although the problem-based learning (PBL) emerged in 1969 and was soon widely applied internationally, the rapid development in China only occurred in the last 10 years. This study aims to compare the effect of PBL and lecture-based learning (LBL) on student course examination results for introductory Chinese undergraduate medical courses. Methods: Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trial studies on PBL use in Chinese undergraduate medical education were retrieved through PubMed, the Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) and VIP China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP-CSTJ) with publication dates from 1st January 1966 till 31 August 2014. The pass rate, excellence rate and examination scores of course examination were collected. Methodological quality was evaluated based on the modified Jadad scale. The I-square statistic and Chi-square test of heterogeneity were used to assess the statistical heterogeneity. Overall RRs or SMDs with their 95% CIs were calculated in meta-analysis. Meta-regression and subgroup meta-analyses were also performed based on comparators and other confounding factors. Funnel plots and Egger’s tests were performed to assess degrees of publication bias. Results: The meta-analysis included 31studies and 4,699 subjects. Fourteen studies were of high quality with modified Jadad scores of 4 to 6, and 17 studies were of low quality with scores of 1 to 3. Relative to the LBL model, the PBL model yielded higher course examination pass rates [RR = 1.09, 95%CI (1.03, 1.17)], excellence rates [RR = 1.66, 95%CI (1.33, 2.06)] and examination scores [SMD = 0.82, 95%CI (0.63, 1.01)]. The meta-regression results show that course type was the significant confounding factor that caused heterogeneity in the examination-score meta-analysis (t = 0.410, P

Suggested Citation

  • Yanqi Zhang & Liang Zhou & Xiaoyu Liu & Ling Liu & Yazhou Wu & Zengwei Zhao & Dali Yi & Dong Yi, 2015. "The Effectiveness of the Problem-Based Learning Teaching Model for Use in Introductory Chinese Undergraduate Medical Courses: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-24, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0120884
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120884
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120884
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0120884&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0120884?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ryan Sterling McCulloch, 2017. "Learning Outcomes in a Laboratory Environment vs. Classroom for Statistics Instruction: An Alternative Approach Using Statistical Software," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 6(5), pages 131-131, October.
    2. Lama Soubra & Mohammad A. Al-Ghouti & Mohammed Abu-Dieyeh & Sergio Crovella & Haissam Abou-Saleh, 2022. "Impacts on Student Learning and Skills and Implementation Challenges of Two Student-Centered Learning Methods Applied in Online Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0120884. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.