Meta-analysis shows open-book exams yield higher STEM exam scores than closed-book exams, with an overall mean difference of 5.91 despite very high heterogeneity¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r1–r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Students scored higher in open-book exam settings relative to closed-book settings (overall mean difference 5.91, 95% CI 2.79 to 9.04, p < 0.01). → Mizori R 2025 q3 i? Heterogeneity across the eight studies was substantial (I² = 97%), reflecting significant variability in study outcomes. → Mizori R 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Mizori R 2025¶

Mizori R, Sadiq M, Ahmad MT, Siu A, Ahmad RR, Yang Z, et al. (2025). STEM exam performance: Open‐ versus closed‐book methods in the large language model era. The Clinical Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13839

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1

Random-effects meta-analysis of eight peer-reviewed studies (2013 onwards) of university STEM students, using standardised mean differences scaled 0–100. The review reports "an overall mean difference of 5.91 (95% CI: 2.79 to 9.04)" favouring OBEs; Figure 2a shows significance at p < 0.01.

"The meta‐analysis revealed a notable increase in marks for OBEs compared to CBEs (see Figure 2a ), with an overall mean difference of 5.91 (95% CI: 2.79 to 9.04)."

Mizori R 2025 (2)¶

Mizori R, Sadiq M, Ahmad MT, Siu A, Ahmad RR, Yang Z, et al. (2025). STEM exam performance: Open‐ versus closed‐book methods in the large language model era. The Clinical Teacher. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13839

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Heterogeneity assessment using I², Cochrane's Q and Tau statistics (REML) across the same eight studies. The review reports "an I 2 value of 97%", indicating the pooled effect rests on highly variable study outcomes.

"There was substantial heterogeneity in the meta‐analysis results, indicated by an I 2 value of 97%. This reflects significant variability in the study outcomes."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Narrative synthesis: three studies found no significant exam-score difference between OBEs and CBEs, with differences emerging only under specific conditions — reports the opposite
• Cheat sheet type was not significantly associated with exam performance on either exam, though a moderate non-significant trend favoured self-created sheets on the final — related
• Sub-group analysis: observational studies show a larger OBE advantage (MD 6.89) than quasi-experimental studies (MD 3.79), with no statistically significant difference between designs — related
• Students prefer open-book exams, citing reduced stress and less intrusive oversight, and OBEs offer institutions logistical advantages — related