CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 50Problem and Project Based LearningInnovations in Medical EducationMedical Education and Admissions

Achievement of Students in a Conventional and Problem-Based Learning (PBL) Curriculum

Kaufman, David M., Mann, Karen V.·1999·Advances in Health Sciences Education
DOI 10.1023/a:1009829831978
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This study compared student performance in problem-based (PBL) and conventional curricula on: 1) basic science knowledge following two preclinical years; 2) the Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examination (MCC) Part I, written upon completion of the four year MD, and 3) Part II of the MCC Qualifying Examination, an assessment of clinical performance after 17 months of postgraduate education. Students in the conventional class of 1995 (n = 81) and the PBL classes of 1996 (n = 84) and 1997 (n = 78) participated. The 1995 conventional class scored significantly higher on the knowledge test than did the 1996 PBL class. The 1997 PBL class performed similarly to the 1995 class. The MCC Part I total examination scores of the three classes were similar. However, the PBL classes of 1996 and 1997 outperformed the class of 1995 in Psychiatry (p = 0.01); also, the PBL class of 1997 outscored the classes of 1995 and 1996 in Preventive Medicine and Community Health (p = 0.001). Two classes have completed the Part II examination. The 1995 and 1996 classes scored similarly in data-gathering, problem-solving and overall. The 1995 class scored significantly higher in communication skills (p = 0.01). We conclude that the performance of PBL and conventional classes is equivalent after medical school, and during postgraduate education, and that knowledge differences found in the first PBL class after two preclinical years have disappeared at the end of fourth year. Basic science knowledge may continue to grow throughout the clinical experience. Differences in communication skills, which favoured the conventional class, require further study.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1009829831978

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 22 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kaufman, D. M., & Mann, K. V.
Affiliations
Dalhousie University (CA)
ORCID
Kaufman, David M.
Venue
Advances in Health Sciences Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1999-11
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
245-260
ISSN
  • 1382-4996 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1677
DOI
10.1023/a:1009829831978
OpenAlex
W2190379738
Cited by
50
References
22
Citations by year
2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Advances in Health Sciences Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
Keywords
problem-based learning, medical education, academic performance, basic science knowledge, clinical performance assessment, communication skills, graduate medical education, curriculum comparison

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