CBL is the highest-ranked strategy for enhancing medical students' theoretical test scores, with CBL, PBL, SBL and FC each significantly outperforming LBL¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 In the network meta-analysis of 58 studies (5,427 students), CBL ranked most likely to enhance theoretical test scores (SUCRA 89.4%), and CBL (SMD = 1.19), PBL (0.71), SBL (0.69) and FC (0.69) each significantly outperformed LBL. → Zhang Shuai-Long 2024

Evidence¶

Zhang Shuai-Long 2024¶

Zhang Shuai-Long, Ren Si-Jing, Zhu Dong-Mei, Liu Tian-Yao, Wang Lian, Zhao Jing-Hui, Fan Xiao-Tang, Gong Hong. (2024). Which novel teaching strategy is most recommended in medical education? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06291-4

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Network meta-analysis of 58 RCTs with 5,427 students reporting theoretical test scores, using a random-effects model. The printed effect size for CBL versus LBL is SMD = 1.19 (95% CI 0.49 to 1.90; SUCRA = 89.4%); the quotation below reports the same comparisons from LBL's side, so its signs are negative; comparisons among the novel strategies crossed zero, showing "no significant difference was observed among the remaining novel teaching strategies".

"Theoretical test scores were significantly lower in students who were taught using LBL teaching strategies compared to those who engaged with 4 novel strategies, including CBL (− 1.19, 95% CI (− 0.49 to − 1.90)), PBL (− 0.71, 95% CI (− 0.18 to − 1.25)), SBL (− 0.69, 95% CI (− 0.26 to − 1.12)), FC (− 0.69, 95% CI (− 0.22 to − 1.17))."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• CBL significantly enhances communication and collaboration skills compared with LBL (RR = 2.49) — related
• CBL produces significantly higher exam scores than LBL in pharmacy education (SMD = 0.58) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• CBL shows the largest effect on theoretical exam scores versus LBL (MD = 13.12) and ranks first among the seven methods — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Differences among the six novel teaching strategies are minor, and in pairwise meta-analysis only BOPPPS and SBL significantly beat LBL on all three outcomes — related
• CBL is the most effective method overall for both theoretical and practical neurology teaching outcomes, with no evidence of publication bias — a broader claim this one bears on
• Emerging teaching methods (PBL, CBL, FC) significantly improve dental students' exam scores compared to lecture-based learning — related
• Subgroup results: CBL ranks best for clinical curricula and across educational backgrounds, while PBL ranks best for basic courses, developing countries, and operational skills — related
• PBL produces higher examination scores than LBL in undergraduate pharmacology education (SMD = 2.03) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• PBL is the highest-ranked strategy for improving medical students' experimental or practical test scores, significantly outperforming LBL — related
• Simulation-based learning improves theoretical knowledge scores in endocrinology education compared with non-simulation-based learning — related
• CBL significantly increases knowledge scores compared with LBL in Chinese dental education (SMD=1.58) — related
• CBL improved exam scores in both basic theory and applied psychology course subgroups, but course type did not explain the heterogeneity — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• CBL effects differ between theoretical and practical courses for knowledge, skill and comprehensive ability scores — related
• PBL improves total cell biology examination scores compared with LBL in Chinese medical education (pooled SMD 0.89) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• PBL and LBL show no significant difference in theoretical knowledge in surgical education — related