Students report higher teaching interest and satisfaction in PBL than in traditional teaching in orthopaedics education¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r3 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2024 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Across 10 RCTs, the PBL group reported higher interest in teaching than the traditional group (OR=4.70). → Li Ting 2024 q3 i3 Across 16 RCTs, PBL yielded higher teaching satisfaction than traditional teaching (OR=5.43). → Li Ting 2024 (2)

Evidence¶

Li Ting 2024¶

Li Ting, Song Ruohong, Zhong Wenjie, Liao Wenao, Hu Jiang, Liu Xilin, Wang Fei. (2024). Use of problem-based learning in orthopaedics education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05244-1

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analysis of 10 RCTs (n=711) reporting dichotomous interest outcomes, fixed effects model, no heterogeneity (I2 =0%). Pooled odds ratio OR=4.70 (95% CI: 3.20~6.93, P<0.00001), a large effect favouring PBL.

"A total of 10 [14, 22, 25, 37, 45, 48, 55–57, 60] studies (n=711) reported interest in teaching. There was no heterogeneity (P=0.82, I2 =0%); therefore, a fixed effects model was used. This meta-analysis examined dichotomous outcomes and revealed that the PBL teaching group reported higher interest in teaching than the traditional teaching group (OR=4.70, 95% CI: 3.20~6.93, P<0.00001; Fig. 7)."

Li Ting 2024 (2)¶

Li Ting, Song Ruohong, Zhong Wenjie, Liao Wenao, Hu Jiang, Liu Xilin, Wang Fei. (2024). Use of problem-based learning in orthopaedics education: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05244-1

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analysis of 16 RCTs (N=1380), fixed effects model (I2 =33%). Pooled odds ratio OR=5.43 (95% CI: 3.83~7.69, P<0.00001), a large effect favouring PBL.

"A total of 16 [13–15, 17, 18, 21–24, 28, 37, 38, 42, 43, 45, 49] studies (N=1380) reported teaching satisfaction. There was no significant heterogeneity (P=0.10, I2 =33%); therefore, a fixed effects model was used. Our study demonstrated that PBL teaching yielded higher levels of teaching satisfaction than traditional teaching (OR=5.43, 95% CI: 3.83~7.69, P<0.00001; Fig. 8)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• PBL students reported significantly higher satisfaction and interest in the course than LBL students — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• In the RCT, PBL students rated their own communication skills and critical thinking significantly higher on a questionnaire than LBL students did — related
• PBL teaching yields higher knowledge scores than traditional teaching in orthopaedics education — related
• PBL teaching yields higher procedural skill and clinical skill scores than traditional teaching in orthopaedics education — related
• PBL teaching yields higher total scores than traditional teaching in orthopaedics education — related
• PBL students experience less learning time and higher learning pressure than traditional-teaching students in orthopaedics education — related
• PBL is not superior to traditional teaching for grasping knowledge points and memory ability, but is superior for literature retrieval, expression, learning motivation, thinking and imaging reading in orthopaedics education — related
• Student satisfaction favours traditional teaching over PBL methods (pooled MD -0.14), conflicting with the skills and knowledge findings — reports the opposite