The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Team‐based learning in anatomy: An efficient, effective, and economical strategy
Abstract
Team‐based learning (TBL) strategy is being adopted in medical education to implement interactive small group learning. We have modified classical TBL to fit our curricular needs and approach. Anatomy lectures were replaced with TBL that required preparation of assigned content specific discussion topics (in the text referred as “discussion topics”), an individual self‐assessment quiz (IRAT), analysis of the discussion topics, and then the team retaking the same quiz (GRAT) for discussion and deeper learning. Embryology and clinical correlations were given as lectures. Unit examinations consisted of graded IRAT and GRAT. The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) Subject Examination was the comprehensive final examination. To evaluate the effect of TBL on student performance we compared the departmental and NBME subject examination scores between the traditional and TBL curricula. We collected five years of data on student performance in TBL‐based anatomy and lecture‐based preclinical courses. Our results show that departmental and NBME subject examination scores for TBL‐based anatomy were higher than those for lecture‐based anatomy. We subsequently compared average NBME scores for anatomy with those in other preclinical courses that were lecture‐based. Average NBME anatomy scores were significantly higher than those for all the lecture‐based preclinical courses. Since the introduction of TBL in anatomy, student performance has progressively improved in the NBME subject examination. Students perceived TBL as a motivator to be a responsible team member and to contribute to collective learning by the team. Further, it reinforced self‐directed learning and fostered an appreciation for peer respect. Interestingly, these perceptions were uniform irrespective of student course performance. Anat Sci Educ. © 2011 American Association of Anatomists.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Reimschisel, T., Herring, A. L., Huang, J., & Minor, T. J. (2017) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1340636 · Cited by 288
Greetham, M., & Ippolito, K. (2018) · Higher Education Pedagogies · doi:10.1080/23752696.2018.1468224 · Cited by 24
Drumm, B. T., Bree, R., Griffin, C. S., & O’Leary, N. (2024) · Advances in Physiology Education · doi:10.1152/advan.00257.2023 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Vasan, N. S., DeFouw, D. O., & Compton, S.
- Venue
- Anatomical Sciences Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-10-13
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 333-339
- ISSN
- 1935-9772 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-9780
- OpenAlex
- W2024116984
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 59.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Team‐based learning in anatomy: An efficient, effective, and economical strategy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ase.257
- The paper
- Vasan, N. S., DeFouw, D. O., & Compton, S. (2011). Team‐based learning in anatomy: An efficient, effective, and economical strategy. Anatomical Sciences Education. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.257
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.