Trainee doctors in medicine prefer case-based learning compared to didactic teaching.
Case-based learning
case-based teaching
medical education
Journal
Journal of family medicine and primary care
ISSN: 2249-4863
Titre abrégé: J Family Med Prim Care
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101610082
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
02
12
2019
revised:
29
12
2019
accepted:
09
01
2020
entrez:
23
4
2020
pubmed:
23
4
2020
medline:
23
4
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sustaining interest and promoting deep learning is a challenge in any teaching method. The purpose of the study is to find the perception of trainee doctors in Internal Medicine and teaching faculty on the usefulness of case-based learning (CBL) and to compare assessment knowledge outcome with didactic seminars. We developed and conducted a CBL teaching program on eight topics in infectious diseases. First group had CBL and second group had didactic seminars. In step 1, a clinical case was introduced in stages. Learning objectives were formulated and topics were divided among the trainees. At step 2, trainees shared what they had learnt from self-directed learning. Faculty summarized the case and learning points. In the seminar group, trainees made presentations on the given topics. Trainees who had CBL underwent a questionnaire survey. Multiple choice questions-based test was administered for both the groups. The trainee doctors and staff overwhelmingly found CBL to be more interesting, stimulating, and useful compared to didactic seminars. There was no statistical difference in the test scores. CBL is a useful and interesting method of learning and should be employed more often in teaching for trainee doctors.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Sustaining interest and promoting deep learning is a challenge in any teaching method. The purpose of the study is to find the perception of trainee doctors in Internal Medicine and teaching faculty on the usefulness of case-based learning (CBL) and to compare assessment knowledge outcome with didactic seminars.
METHODS AND MATERIALS
METHODS
We developed and conducted a CBL teaching program on eight topics in infectious diseases. First group had CBL and second group had didactic seminars. In step 1, a clinical case was introduced in stages. Learning objectives were formulated and topics were divided among the trainees. At step 2, trainees shared what they had learnt from self-directed learning. Faculty summarized the case and learning points. In the seminar group, trainees made presentations on the given topics. Trainees who had CBL underwent a questionnaire survey. Multiple choice questions-based test was administered for both the groups.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The trainee doctors and staff overwhelmingly found CBL to be more interesting, stimulating, and useful compared to didactic seminars. There was no statistical difference in the test scores.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
CBL is a useful and interesting method of learning and should be employed more often in teaching for trainee doctors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32318385
doi: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1093_19
pii: JFMPC-9-580
pmc: PMC7113923
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
580-584Informations de copyright
Copyright: © Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
There are no conflicts of interest.
Références
Acad Med. 2018 Jun;93(6):943-951
pubmed: 29210753
J Clin Diagn Res. 2013 Aug;7(8):1576-8
pubmed: 24086843
J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2019 Apr-Jun;11(2):187-189
pubmed: 31148897
Med Teach. 2019 Oct;41(10):1124-1128
pubmed: 31215320
Nurse Educ Today. 2010 Aug;30(6):533-8
pubmed: 20005608
Med Teach. 2012;34(6):e421-44
pubmed: 22578051
Adv Physiol Educ. 2019 Dec 1;43(4):504-511
pubmed: 31553644
Med Educ. 1990 Mar;24(2):101-9
pubmed: 2319967
BMJ. 1998 Jan 31;316(7128):345-50
pubmed: 9487168
Indian J Pharmacol. 2012 Sep-Oct;44(5):634-8
pubmed: 23112428
Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue. 2013 Dec;22(6):711-4
pubmed: 24469141
Med Educ. 2010 Nov;44(11):1057-68
pubmed: 20946476
Diabetes Care. 2009 Apr;32(4):585-90
pubmed: 19171723
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 May 9;63(18):393-8
pubmed: 24807237
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Feb;192(2):644-7
pubmed: 15696016
Emerg Med J. 2005 Aug;22(8):577-81
pubmed: 16046764