Claims

More PBL than LBL students report satisfaction with improved comprehension of knowledge (RR = 1.84)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · 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? A higher proportion of PBL than LBL students believed PBL improved their comprehension of knowledge (71.0% vs 41.2%; RR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.26–2.67). → Yang X 2024

Evidence

Yang X 2024

Yang X, Yang Z, Ma S, Yan M, Yang Y. (2024). Evaluation of problem-based learning for pharmacology based on a comprehensive analysis in undergraduate students. Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000039376

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analysis of 5 studies involving 610 students reporting satisfaction with improved comprehension of knowledge, random-effects model. The pooled risk ratio favored PBL: "RR = 1.84, 95% CI [1.26, 2.67], P = .001, I2 = 85%"; no standardized effect size was printed for this outcome.

"Compared with LBL, a higher proportion of students believed that the PBL method had a greater impact on improving their comprehension of knowledge (71.0% in the PBL group vs 41.2% in the LBL group, RR = 1.84, 95% CI [1.26, 2.67], P = .001, I2 = 85%)."

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.