Evaluating the outcomes of problem-based learning in postgraduate medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Canadian medical education journal Pub Date : 2025-02-28 eCollection Date: 2025-02-01 DOI:10.36834/cmej.77394
Emma A Mensour, Carolyn Tran, Toni Li, Indika Mallawaarachchi, Jennifer M Shaw, Sarah Blissett
{"title":"Evaluating the outcomes of problem-based learning in postgraduate medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Emma A Mensour, Carolyn Tran, Toni Li, Indika Mallawaarachchi, Jennifer M Shaw, Sarah Blissett","doi":"10.36834/cmej.77394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Educators have recently been compelled to incorporate more active instructional formats into medical education, such as problem-based learning (PBL). In view of the mixed outcome data on the use of PBL in postgraduate medical education (PGME), there is a need to synthesize the data to inform the application of PBL in PGME contexts.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize learning outcomes of PBL in PGME contexts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, and Cochrane databases from January 1, 1950, to July 1, 2022 for original studies that reported Kirkpatrick outcomes of PBL in PGME contexts. Outcomes data were extracted. Quantitative data relating to learning outcomes were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model to generate weighted mean differences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 4310 abstracts screened, the authors included 21 studies encompassing anesthesia, family medicine, internal medicine, occupational medicine, pediatrics, psychiatry, public health and surgical residency programs. The studies reported reaction (<i>n</i> = 12), learning (<i>n</i> = 15), behavioural (<i>n</i> = 6) and/or results outcomes (<i>n</i> = 4). Meta-analysis of the three eligible articles demonstrated no significant difference after PBL in pre- and post-test results (pooled mean difference=0.13%, 95% CI, -6.74-7.00). There were observed improvements in satisfaction levels and self-reported behavioural outcomes following PBL.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although similar learning outcomes were observed using PBL and the usual teaching in PGME, PBL was associated with benefits in trainee satisfaction and behavioural changes that contribute to learning and performance. PGME programs should consider incorporating PBL into curricula.</p>","PeriodicalId":72503,"journal":{"name":"Canadian medical education journal","volume":"16 1","pages":"89-99"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11931181/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian medical education journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.77394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Educators have recently been compelled to incorporate more active instructional formats into medical education, such as problem-based learning (PBL). In view of the mixed outcome data on the use of PBL in postgraduate medical education (PGME), there is a need to synthesize the data to inform the application of PBL in PGME contexts.

Objective: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize learning outcomes of PBL in PGME contexts.

Methods: The authors systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycINFO, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, and Cochrane databases from January 1, 1950, to July 1, 2022 for original studies that reported Kirkpatrick outcomes of PBL in PGME contexts. Outcomes data were extracted. Quantitative data relating to learning outcomes were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model to generate weighted mean differences.

Results: Of 4310 abstracts screened, the authors included 21 studies encompassing anesthesia, family medicine, internal medicine, occupational medicine, pediatrics, psychiatry, public health and surgical residency programs. The studies reported reaction (n = 12), learning (n = 15), behavioural (n = 6) and/or results outcomes (n = 4). Meta-analysis of the three eligible articles demonstrated no significant difference after PBL in pre- and post-test results (pooled mean difference=0.13%, 95% CI, -6.74-7.00). There were observed improvements in satisfaction levels and self-reported behavioural outcomes following PBL.

Conclusions: Although similar learning outcomes were observed using PBL and the usual teaching in PGME, PBL was associated with benefits in trainee satisfaction and behavioural changes that contribute to learning and performance. PGME programs should consider incorporating PBL into curricula.

评估研究生医学教育中基于问题的学习的结果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:教育工作者最近被迫将更积极的教学形式纳入医学教育,如基于问题的学习(PBL)。鉴于在研究生医学教育中使用PBL的结果数据参差不齐,有必要综合这些数据,为PBL在研究生医学教育中的应用提供信息。目的:本系统回顾和荟萃分析的目的是综合PBL在PGME背景下的学习结果。方法:作者系统地检索了MEDLINE、Embase、APA PsycINFO、AMED、CINAHL、Web of Science、ERIC和Cochrane数据库,从1950年1月1日至2022年7月1日期间报道PBL在PGME背景下的Kirkpatrick结局的原始研究。提取结局数据。使用随机效应模型对与学习结果相关的定量数据进行meta分析,以产生加权平均差异。结果:在筛选的4310篇摘要中,作者纳入了21项研究,包括麻醉、家庭医学、内科、职业医学、儿科、精神病学、公共卫生和外科住院医师项目。这些研究报告了反应(n = 12)、学习(n = 15)、行为(n = 6)和/或结果结局(n = 4)。对三篇符合条件的文章进行荟萃分析显示,PBL后测试前和测试后结果无显著差异(合并平均差异=0.13%,95% CI, -6.74-7.00)。观察到PBL后满意度和自我报告行为结果的改善。结论:尽管在PGME中使用PBL和常规教学观察到相似的学习结果,但PBL与学员满意度和有助于学习和表现的行为改变有关。PGME项目应考虑将PBL纳入课程。
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
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信