Claims

Flipped classroom shows a significant pooled advantage over lecture-based learning in dental education (SMD = 0.50)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q4 · i2 medium
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.

q4 i2 FC subgroup analysis showed significantly higher teaching effects than LBL (SMD = 0.50, 95% CI 0.31-0.69, P < .001). → Pang Xuefei 2024

Evidence

Pang Xuefei 2024

Pang Xuefei, Li Ling, Liu Xu, Wang Yan, Yang Bo. (2024). Application of Emerging Teaching Models in Dental Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Dental Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.identj.2024.05.016

q4 · i2 · quant-synthesis · r3

Subgroup analysis by teaching method (Figure 3B) across the 29 included RCTs; FC was the most common experimental method (16 studies). The pooled FC effect was "significantly higher teaching effects than traditional teaching method LBL".

"both PBL (SMD = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.01-0.65, P = .045) and FC (SMD = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.31-0.69, P < .001) had significantly higher teaching effects than traditional teaching method LBL"

Discussion

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.