Effect of problem-based learning combined with seminar versus traditional teaching method in medical education in China: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis.
{"title":"Effect of problem-based learning combined with seminar versus traditional teaching method in medical education in China: a systematic evaluation and meta-analysis.","authors":"Haozhong Wang, Qiang Yuan, Yinling Guo, Xiuli Zheng, Jian Luo, Junhui Qian","doi":"10.3389/fmed.2025.1592199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study systematically evaluates the effectiveness of combining problem-based learning with the seminar teaching method and the traditional lecture-based learning model in medical education by meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A computer-based search of major domestic and international literature databases was conducted, including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), Wanfang Database, VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals Database, and China Biology Medicine disk (CBMdisc). The search period spanned from the inception of the databases to 30 August 2024. Quantitative synthesis was performed using the RevMan V.5.4 software, following the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 13 articles involving 857 medical students were included. The meta-analysis results revealed statistically significant differences between the experimental and control groups in the following areas: theoretical knowledge scores (MD = 4.99, 95% CI: 4.29-5.69, <i>p</i> < 0.00001); clinical skill scores (MD = 4.98,95% CI: 4.21-5.75, <i>p</i> < 0.00001); case analysis ability (SMD = 3.07, 95% CI: 2.66-3.47, <i>p</i> < 0.00001); Learning interest (SMD = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.89-3.03, <i>p</i> < 0.00001); Active learning (SMD = 3.26, 95% CI: 2.66-3.85, <i>p</i> < 0.00001); teamwork abilities (SMD = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.27-2.05, <i>p</i> < 0.00001); students' research and academic ability (MD = 26.85, 95% CI: 24.79-28.91, <i>p</i> < 0.00001). The experimental group demonstrated superior outcomes in all areas compared to the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This meta-analysis showed that the integration of problem-based learning and seminar teaching methods is an effective method for improving theoretical knowledge scores, clinical skill scores, case analysis ability, learning interest, active learning, teamwork abilities and research and academic ability.</p>","PeriodicalId":12488,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Medicine","volume":"12 ","pages":"1592199"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12256451/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2025.1592199","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: This study systematically evaluates the effectiveness of combining problem-based learning with the seminar teaching method and the traditional lecture-based learning model in medical education by meta-analysis.
Methods: A computer-based search of major domestic and international literature databases was conducted, including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure(CNKI), Wanfang Database, VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodicals Database, and China Biology Medicine disk (CBMdisc). The search period spanned from the inception of the databases to 30 August 2024. Quantitative synthesis was performed using the RevMan V.5.4 software, following the Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook guidelines and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement.
Results: A total of 13 articles involving 857 medical students were included. The meta-analysis results revealed statistically significant differences between the experimental and control groups in the following areas: theoretical knowledge scores (MD = 4.99, 95% CI: 4.29-5.69, p < 0.00001); clinical skill scores (MD = 4.98,95% CI: 4.21-5.75, p < 0.00001); case analysis ability (SMD = 3.07, 95% CI: 2.66-3.47, p < 0.00001); Learning interest (SMD = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.89-3.03, p < 0.00001); Active learning (SMD = 3.26, 95% CI: 2.66-3.85, p < 0.00001); teamwork abilities (SMD = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.27-2.05, p < 0.00001); students' research and academic ability (MD = 26.85, 95% CI: 24.79-28.91, p < 0.00001). The experimental group demonstrated superior outcomes in all areas compared to the control group.
Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed that the integration of problem-based learning and seminar teaching methods is an effective method for improving theoretical knowledge scores, clinical skill scores, case analysis ability, learning interest, active learning, teamwork abilities and research and academic ability.
期刊介绍:
Frontiers in Medicine publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research linking basic research to clinical practice and patient care, as well as translating scientific advances into new therapies and diagnostic tools. Led by an outstanding Editorial Board of international experts, this multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
In addition to papers that provide a link between basic research and clinical practice, a particular emphasis is given to studies that are directly relevant to patient care. In this spirit, the journal publishes the latest research results and medical knowledge that facilitate the translation of scientific advances into new therapies or diagnostic tools. The full listing of the Specialty Sections represented by Frontiers in Medicine is as listed below. As well as the established medical disciplines, Frontiers in Medicine is launching new sections that together will facilitate
- the use of patient-reported outcomes under real world conditions
- the exploitation of big data and the use of novel information and communication tools in the assessment of new medicines
- the scientific bases for guidelines and decisions from regulatory authorities
- access to medicinal products and medical devices worldwide
- addressing the grand health challenges around the world