Problem-Based Learning and Case-Based Learning in Clinical Practical Teaching for Gynecology Residents: A Narrative Review.

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Advances in Medical Education and Practice Pub Date : 2025-07-23 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/AMEP.S534053
Ying Zhu, Jiaojiao Zhang, Jing Fei, Huibin Fang, Zhigang Zhang
{"title":"Problem-Based Learning and Case-Based Learning in Clinical Practical Teaching for Gynecology Residents: A Narrative Review.","authors":"Ying Zhu, Jiaojiao Zhang, Jing Fei, Huibin Fang, Zhigang Zhang","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S534053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gynecology residency training necessitates a robust educational framework to cultivate clinical competency, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. Traditional lecture-based teaching methods are deficient in fostering active learning and clinical decision-making. Problem-based learning (PBL) and case-based learning (CBL) have emerged as learner-centered approaches that enhance medical education by integrating theoretical knowledge with clinical practice. This review aims to explain the efficacy, implementation frameworks, challenges, and comparative value of PBL and CBL in gynecology residency education, and explores the role of instructional technology integration.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, ERIC, Scopus, Embase, and EBSCO (January 2010-January 2025) using keywords: \"problem-based learning\", \"case-based learning\", \"gynecology education\", \"residency training\". Inclusion criteria encompassed studies on PBL/CBL interventions in gynecology residency with qualitative/quantitative outcomes. Ten articles met the criteria after screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both PBL and CBL significantly outperform in enhancing clinical decision-making, differential diagnosis, knowledge retention, procedural planning, and long-term knowledge application. PBL utilizes open-ended problems to cultivate self-directed learning, critical thinking, and collaborative problem-solving (eg, managing complex AUB etiologies). CBL employs structured clinical cases to bridge theoretical knowledge with practical application, improving diagnostic reasoning and patient management skills. Key implementation frameworks involve careful pre-session preparation, facilitator-guided discussions on authentic cases, and structured feedback. Challenges include significant faculty time for case design/facilitation, resource intensity, and competency assessment. PBL fosters deep theoretical understanding, while CBL excels in clinical skill translation. Integrating both approaches creates a balanced curriculum. Augmenting PBL/CBL with simulation, flipped classrooms, mobile learning, and AI enhances accessibility, personalization, and procedural skill practice.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>PBL and CBL are transformative pedagogical strategies for gynecology residency training, effectively developing competencies needed for complex clinical practice. Successful implementation requires rigorously designed cases, faculty trained in facilitative guidance, and strategic technology integration. These approaches prepare residents not only as skilled technicians but as adaptable, patient-centered practitioners capable of navigating evolving healthcare challenges. Investment in faculty development and technology-enhanced PBL/CBL models is crucial for advancing gynecologic education globally.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"16 ","pages":"1269-1279"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12301251/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S534053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Gynecology residency training necessitates a robust educational framework to cultivate clinical competency, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. Traditional lecture-based teaching methods are deficient in fostering active learning and clinical decision-making. Problem-based learning (PBL) and case-based learning (CBL) have emerged as learner-centered approaches that enhance medical education by integrating theoretical knowledge with clinical practice. This review aims to explain the efficacy, implementation frameworks, challenges, and comparative value of PBL and CBL in gynecology residency education, and explores the role of instructional technology integration.

Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, ERIC, Scopus, Embase, and EBSCO (January 2010-January 2025) using keywords: "problem-based learning", "case-based learning", "gynecology education", "residency training". Inclusion criteria encompassed studies on PBL/CBL interventions in gynecology residency with qualitative/quantitative outcomes. Ten articles met the criteria after screening.

Results: Both PBL and CBL significantly outperform in enhancing clinical decision-making, differential diagnosis, knowledge retention, procedural planning, and long-term knowledge application. PBL utilizes open-ended problems to cultivate self-directed learning, critical thinking, and collaborative problem-solving (eg, managing complex AUB etiologies). CBL employs structured clinical cases to bridge theoretical knowledge with practical application, improving diagnostic reasoning and patient management skills. Key implementation frameworks involve careful pre-session preparation, facilitator-guided discussions on authentic cases, and structured feedback. Challenges include significant faculty time for case design/facilitation, resource intensity, and competency assessment. PBL fosters deep theoretical understanding, while CBL excels in clinical skill translation. Integrating both approaches creates a balanced curriculum. Augmenting PBL/CBL with simulation, flipped classrooms, mobile learning, and AI enhances accessibility, personalization, and procedural skill practice.

Conclusion: PBL and CBL are transformative pedagogical strategies for gynecology residency training, effectively developing competencies needed for complex clinical practice. Successful implementation requires rigorously designed cases, faculty trained in facilitative guidance, and strategic technology integration. These approaches prepare residents not only as skilled technicians but as adaptable, patient-centered practitioners capable of navigating evolving healthcare challenges. Investment in faculty development and technology-enhanced PBL/CBL models is crucial for advancing gynecologic education globally.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

基于问题的学习与基于案例的学习在妇科住院医师临床实践教学中的应用述评。
背景:妇科住院医师培训需要一个健全的教育框架来培养临床能力、批判性思维和解决问题的能力。传统的讲授型教学方法在培养学生主动学习和临床决策方面存在不足。基于问题的学习(PBL)和基于案例的学习(CBL)已经成为以学习者为中心的方法,通过将理论知识与临床实践相结合来加强医学教育。本文旨在解释PBL和CBL在妇科住院医师教育中的效果、实施框架、挑战和比较价值,并探讨教学技术整合的作用。方法:系统检索PubMed、ERIC、Scopus、Embase和EBSCO(2010年1月- 2025年1月)的相关文献,检索关键词为“基于问题的学习”、“基于案例的学习”、“妇科教育”、“住院医师培训”。纳入标准包括妇科住院医师PBL/CBL干预的定性/定量结果研究。经筛选,有10篇文章符合标准。结果:PBL和CBL在促进临床决策、鉴别诊断、知识保留、程序规划和长期知识应用方面均有显著优势。PBL利用开放式问题来培养自主学习、批判性思维和协作解决问题(例如,管理复杂的AUB病因)。CBL采用结构化的临床案例,将理论知识与实际应用相结合,提高诊断推理和患者管理技能。关键的实施框架包括认真的会前准备、由辅导员指导的关于真实案例的讨论以及结构化的反馈。挑战包括大量的教师时间用于案例设计/促进、资源强度和能力评估。PBL培养深入的理论理解,CBL擅长临床技能转化。整合这两种方法可以创建一个平衡的课程。通过模拟、翻转教室、移动学习和人工智能增强PBL/CBL,可以提高可访问性、个性化和程序性技能练习。结论:PBL和CBL是妇科住院医师培训的变革性教学策略,能有效地培养复杂临床实践所需的能力。成功的实施需要严格设计的案例,在促进指导和战略技术集成方面受过培训的教师。这些方法不仅使居民成为熟练的技术人员,而且成为适应能力强、以患者为中心的从业人员,能够应对不断变化的医疗保健挑战。在师资发展和技术增强PBL/CBL模式的投资是推动全球妇科教育的关键。
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
Advances in Medical Education and Practice
Advances in Medical Education and Practice EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
189
审稿时长
16 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信