The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Task‐based learning: the answer to integration and problem‐based learning in the clinical years
Abstract
Intoduction: Integrated teaching and problem‐based learning (PBL) are powerful educational strategies. Difficulties arise, however, in their application in the later years of the undergraduate medical curriculum, particularly in clinical attachments. Two solutions have been proposed – the use of integrated clinical teaching teams and time allocated during the week for PBL separate from the clinical work. Both approaches have significant disadvantages. Task‐based learning (TBL) is a preferred strategy. In TBL, a range of tasks undertaken by a doctor are identified, e.g. management of a patient with abdominal pain, and these are used as the focus for learning. Students have responsibility for integrating their learning round the tasks as they move through a range of clinical attachments in different disciplines. They are assisted in this process by study guides. Method: The implementation of TBL is described in one medical school. One hundred and thirteen tasks, arranged in 16 groups, serve to integrate the student learning as they rotate through 10 clinical attachments. Results: This trans‐disciplinary approach to integration, which incorporates the principles of PBL offers advantages to both teachers and students. It recognizes that clinical attachments in individual disciplines can offer rich learning opportunities and that such attachments can play a role in an integrated, as well as in a traditional, curriculum. In TBL, the contributions of the clinical attachments to the curriculum learning outcomes must be clearly defined and tasks selected which will serve as a focus for the integration of the students’ learning over the range of attachments.
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
Cites
Educational strategies in curriculum development: the SPICES model
HARDEN, R. M., SOWDEN, S., & DUNN, W. R. (1984) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.1984.tb01024.x · Cited by 772
Cited by
American Medical Education 100 Years after the Flexner Report
Cooke, M., Irby, D. M., Sullivan, W., & Ludmerer, K. M. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra055445 · Cited by 883
The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96
Brauer, D. G., & Ferguson, K. J. (2015) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2014.970998 · Cited by 571
“Continuity” as an Organizing Principle for Clinical Education Reform
Hirsh, D. A., Ogur, B., Thibault, G. E., & Cox, M. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsb061660 · Cited by 540
The Harvard Medical School-Cambridge Integrated Clerkship: An Innovative Model of Clinical Education
Ogur, B., Hirsh, D., Krupat, E., & Bor, D. (2007) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e31803338f0 · Cited by 288
How and what do medical students learn in clerkships? Experience based learning (ExBL)
Dornan, T., Tan, N., Boshuizen, H., Gick, R., Isba, R., Mann, K., Scherpbier, A., Spencer, J., & Timmins, E. (2014) · Advances in Health Sciences Education · doi:10.1007/s10459-014-9501-0 · Cited by 198
Metadata
- Authors
- Harden, Crosby, Davis, Howie, & Struthers
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2000-05
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 391-397
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W1980740349
- Cited by
- 186
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.38
- 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: Task‐based learning: the answer to integration and problem‐based learning in the clinical years. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00698.x
- The paper
- Harden, Crosby, Davis, Howie, & Struthers. (2000). Task‐based learning: the answer to integration and problem‐based learning in the clinical years. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00698.x
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.