Cited by 80Problem and Project Based LearningInnovations in Medical EducationHealth Sciences Research and Education

Problem‐based learning: a dissemination success story?

Sanson‐Fisher, Robert W, Lynagh, Marita C·2005·Medical Journal of Australia

Abstract

The demand to implement clinical and educational strategies based on evidence has increased in the past two decades. Over a similar time frame, the problem-based learning (PBL) approach has been widely adopted by undergraduate medical schools, in spite of empirical reviews suggesting that its effectiveness may be limited. Students claim that PBL provides a more satisfying learning experience than traditional methods. While such an outcome is desirable, it is substantively less than the original promise of the approach. We hypothesise that the widespread adoption of PBL may be more a consequence of the approach meeting criteria for successful dissemination than of demonstrable positive educational outcomes. We suggest that greater effort should be taken to articulate and measure important undergraduate educational outcomes. Alternatives to the PBL approach should be actively considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2005.tb07032.x

Cites

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?

  • Sanson-Fisher and Lynagh (2005) concluded that available evidence, although methodologically flawed, offers little support for the superiority of problem-based learning over traditional curricula.

    “an article on the same topic by Sanson-Fisher and Lynagh (2005) concluded that “Available evidence, although methodologically flawed, offers little support for the superiority of PBL over traditional curricula””

    From Overview of Problem-based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions (2006) · cites this paper as Sanson-Fisher and Lynagh (2005)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sanson‐Fisher, R. W., & Lynagh, M. C.
Affiliations
  • Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, NSW.
  • University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2005-09
Volume
183
Issue
5
Pages
258-260
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
OpenAlex
W2169569307
Cited by
80
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 9
FWCI
34.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Medical Journal of Australia (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 › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
Keywords
problem-based learning, medical education, evidence-based education, undergraduate medical students, educational outcomes, student satisfaction
MeSH terms
Australia, Clinical Competence, Consumer Behavior, Culture, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Educational Measurement, Humans, Social Environment, Program Evaluation, Problem-Based Learning

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