Live case-based discussion outperformed paper cases on clinical reasoning performance at posttest and follow-up¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Live-CCD in comparison with paper cases had a significant and very large influence on clinical reasoning performance in posttest (SMD 1.936) and follow-up (SMD 1.933); Video-CCD showed smaller significant effects (SMD 1.108 posttest; 1.49 follow-up). → Delavari S 2024

Evidence¶

Delavari S 2024¶

Delavari S, Barzkar F, Rikers MJP, Pourahmadi M, Soltani Arabshahi SK, Keshtkar A, Dargahi H, Yaghmaei M, Monajemi A. (2024). Teaching and learning clinical reasoning skill in undergraduate medical students: A scoping review. PLOS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0309606

q3 · i3 · review · r3

The review reports, from an included study attributed to Weidenbusch et al. (reference [38]), printed effect sizes SMD = 1.936 at posttest and SMD = 1.933 at follow-up, both P < 0.001; video-CCD effects (SMD = 1.108 and 1.49) were smaller but significant.

"Live-CCD in comparison paper cases had a significant and very large influence on clinical reasoning performance in posttest (SMD, 1.936 [1.337–2.535]; P < 0.001) and follow-up (1.933 [1.334–2.532]; P < 0.001)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Blended teaching (TBL plus feedback and reflection) outperformed traditional bedside teaching on clinical reasoning performance — related
• Virtual patient simulations show mixed effects: improved diagnostic accuracy in one trial, no advantage over video teaching in another, and short-lived knowledge gains — related
• AI-powered PBL/CBL shows favourable but heterogeneous effects on clinical reasoning capability that could not be statistically pooled — related