Claims

PBL teaching yields higher total scores than traditional teaching in orthopaedics education

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · 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? Across 11 RCTs, the PBL group had higher total scores than the traditional teaching group (MD=5.69). → Li Ting 2024

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 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Meta-analysis of 11 RCTs (n=1259), fixed effects model, no significant heterogeneity (I2 =32%). Pooled unstandardized mean difference MD=5.69 (95% CI: 5.11~6.26, P<0.00001) favouring PBL; no standardized effect size was printed for this outcome.

"A total of 11 [13, 15, 24, 32, 36, 44, 52, 54, 57–59] studies (n=1259) reported total scores. There was no significant heterogeneity (P=0.14, I2 =32%); therefore, a fixed effects model was used. The PBL group had higher total PBL scores than the traditional teaching group (MD=5.69, 95% CI: 5.11~6.26, P<0.00001; Fig. 6)."

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.