CBL is the most effective method overall for both theoretical and practical neurology teaching outcomes, with no evidence of publication bias¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesisr2·q3
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The NMA concluded CBL is the optimal strategy when theoretical or practical test scores measure neurology education effectiveness. → Li Xiangyu 2024
q3 i? Begg's tests and comparison-adjusted funnel plots found no publication bias (theoretical P = 0.060; practical P = 0.348). → Li Xiangyu 2024 (2)
Evidence¶
Li Xiangyu 2024¶
Li Xiangyu, Zhang Longsheng, Sun Wenjun, Lei Min, Li Ying, Zhang Jiacheng, Huang Xing. (2024). Comparison of the effects of different teaching methods on the effectiveness of teaching neurology in China: a bayesian network meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06397-9
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2
The discussion's summary of the Bayesian NMA of 31 RCTs involving 2,124 students and 7 teaching methods; CBL ranked first on both outcomes (SUCRA 98.4% theoretical, 89.2% practical). This is the authors' synthesis conclusion, not a standardized effect size.
"CBL is the optimal strategy when we use theoretical or practical test scores to measure the effect of neurology education."
Li Xiangyu 2024 (2)¶
Li Xiangyu, Zhang Longsheng, Sun Wenjun, Lei Min, Li Ying, Zhang Jiacheng, Huang Xing. (2024). Comparison of the effects of different teaching methods on the effectiveness of teaching neurology in China: a bayesian network meta-analysis and systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06397-9
q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2
Publication-bias assessment of the NMA: Begg's tests and comparison-adjusted funnel plots showed symmetric scatter for theoretical exam scores (P = 0.060) and practical skill scores (P = 0.348), indicating no small-sample effect or publication bias.
"The results of Begg' tests suggested no publication bias in the included studies."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- CBL shows the largest effect on theoretical exam scores versus LBL (MD = 13.12) and ranks first among the seven methods — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- In Chinese neurology training, CBL, PBL, TBL, FCM and EBM each significantly improve theoretical exam scores compared with lecture-based learning — related
- For practical skills, EBM shows the largest effect versus LBL (MD = 13.34) and the ranking is CBL > EBM > PBL > TBL > FCM > CP > LBL — reports the opposite
- The evidence network comprised 31 RCTs with 2,124 subjects and only direct two-arm comparisons, with no closed loops — related
- CBL is the highest-ranked strategy for enhancing medical students' theoretical test scores, with CBL, PBL, SBL and FC each significantly outperforming LBL — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
- Subgroup results: CBL ranks best for clinical curricula and across educational backgrounds, while PBL ranks best for basic courses, developing countries, and operational skills — reports the opposite
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-31 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.