The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Active learning in a Year 2 pathology curriculum
Open accessAbstract
Purpose Team‐based learning (TBL) has been successfully used in non‐medical curricula, but its effectiveness in medical education has not been studied extensively. We evaluated the impact of TBL on the academic performance of Year 2 medical students at Wright State University by comparing this active learning strategy against a traditional method of case‐based group discussion (CBGD). Methods A prospective crossover design assigned 83 Year 2 medical students to either CBGD or TBL for 8 pathology modules in the systems‐based curriculum. The effectiveness of both learning methods was assessed by performance on pathology‐based examination questions contained in end‐of‐course examinations. The highest and lowest academic quartiles of students were evaluated separately. Students' opinions of both methods were surveyed. Results No significant differences in whole group performance on pathology‐based examination questions were observed as a consequence of experiencing TBL versus CBGD. However, students in the lowest academic quartile showed better examination performance after experiencing TBL than CBGD in 4 of 8 modules ( P = 0.035). Students perceived that the contributions of peers to learning were more helpful during TBL than CBGD ( P = 0.003). Conclusion This study demonstrates that TBL and CBGD are equally effective active learning strategies when employed in a systems‐based pre‐clinical pathology curriculum, but students with lower academic performance may benefit more from TBL than CBGD.
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
Thistlethwaite, J. E., Davies, D., Ekeocha, S., Kidd, J. M., MacDougall, C., Matthews, P., Purkis, J., & Clay, D. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.680939 · Cited by 1,241
The Impact of Team-Based Learning on Medical Studentsʼ Academic Performance
Koles, P. G., Stolfi, A., Borges, N. J., Nelson, S., & Parmelee, D. X. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181f52bed · Cited by 498
Self-citationFatmi, M., Hartling, L., Hillier, T., Campbell, S., & Oswald, A. E. (2013) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2013.849802 · Cited by 305
Reimschisel, T., Herring, A. L., Huang, J., & Minor, T. J. (2017) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1340636 · Cited by 288
Zgheib, N. K., Simaan, J. A., & Sabra, R. (2010) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/01421590903548521 · Cited by 173
Metadata
- Authors
- Koles, P., Nelson, S., Stolfi, A., Parmelee, D., & DeStephen, D.
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-08-27
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1045-1055
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W2167818315
- Cited by
- 173
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Active learning in a Year 2 pathology curriculum. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02248.x
- The paper
- Koles, P., Nelson, S., Stolfi, A., Parmelee, D., & DeStephen, D. (2005). Active learning in a Year 2 pathology curriculum. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02248.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.