Team Based Learning Vs Problem Based Learning in Medical Education: A Systematic Review.

Mark Gera, Urvashi Rathod, Ayah Karra-Aly, E. Aluckal, A. Abraham
{"title":"Team Based Learning Vs Problem Based Learning in Medical Education: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Mark Gera, Urvashi Rathod, Ayah Karra-Aly, E. Aluckal, A. Abraham","doi":"10.32677/ejms.v8i1.3795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Problem-based learning (PBL) has been widely used in medical education since the 1960s. In recent years, Team-based learning (TBL) has gained popularity and has been applied in various medical and other professional institutions around the world. The objective of this systematic review was to identify which teaching pedagogy, TBL or PBL, is more effective in delivering medical education. Method: The authors searched PsycNet, ERIC and PubMed databases for articles on TBL and PBL in regards to medical education, published between 2002 and 2020. The articles were selected and reviewed by the PRISMA framework guidelines. Results: The authors identified 15 articles after full-text screening that satisfied their inclusion criteria. Of the 15 articles, 12 incorporated a modified TBL format, while 3 described classic PBL. Conclusions: Overall, the majority of the articles demonstrated a positive learning experience of TBL programs. There are pros and cons to both TBL and PBL. The advantages include promoting critical thinking and fostering collaboration, while disadvantages are lack of motivation and poor clinical problem solving. In the future, finding a way to merge both of these teaching methods might optimize learning experiences in medical education.","PeriodicalId":363370,"journal":{"name":"Eastern Journal of Medical Sciences","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eastern Journal of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32677/ejms.v8i1.3795","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: Problem-based learning (PBL) has been widely used in medical education since the 1960s. In recent years, Team-based learning (TBL) has gained popularity and has been applied in various medical and other professional institutions around the world. The objective of this systematic review was to identify which teaching pedagogy, TBL or PBL, is more effective in delivering medical education. Method: The authors searched PsycNet, ERIC and PubMed databases for articles on TBL and PBL in regards to medical education, published between 2002 and 2020. The articles were selected and reviewed by the PRISMA framework guidelines. Results: The authors identified 15 articles after full-text screening that satisfied their inclusion criteria. Of the 15 articles, 12 incorporated a modified TBL format, while 3 described classic PBL. Conclusions: Overall, the majority of the articles demonstrated a positive learning experience of TBL programs. There are pros and cons to both TBL and PBL. The advantages include promoting critical thinking and fostering collaboration, while disadvantages are lack of motivation and poor clinical problem solving. In the future, finding a way to merge both of these teaching methods might optimize learning experiences in medical education.
医学教育中基于团队的学习Vs基于问题的学习:系统回顾
目的:自20世纪60年代以来,基于问题的学习(PBL)在医学教育中得到广泛应用。近年来,基于团队的学习(Team-based learning, TBL)在世界各地的医疗和其他专业机构中得到了广泛的应用。本系统综述的目的是确定哪种教学方法,TBL或PBL,在提供医学教育方面更有效。方法:作者检索PsycNet、ERIC和PubMed数据库,检索2002年至2020年间发表的与医学教育相关的TBL和PBL的文章。这些文章是由PRISMA框架准则选择和审查的。结果:经过全文筛选,作者确定了15篇符合纳入标准的文章。在15篇文章中,12篇纳入了改进的TBL格式,而3篇描述了经典的PBL。结论:总体而言,大多数文章显示了TBL课程的积极学习体验。TBL和PBL都有利有弊。优点是促进批判性思维和促进合作,缺点是缺乏动力和临床问题解决能力差。在未来,寻找一种将这两种教学方法结合起来的方法可能会优化医学教育的学习体验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信