Claims

PBL improves skill scores in Chinese physical diagnostics education compared with traditional teaching (SMD = 1.46)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-11-01 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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 i3 Meta-analysis of 10 studies found significantly higher skill scores for PBL students (SMD = 1.46, 95%CI 0.89–2.02). → Wang 2016

Evidence

Wang 2016

Wang, J., Xu, Y., Liu, X., Xiong, W., Xie, J., & Zhao, J. (2016). Assessing the effectiveness of problem-based learning in physical diagnostics education in China: a meta-analysis. Scientific Reports. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5093758/

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r2

Random-effects meta-analysis of 10 studies with usable skill-score data (1599 medical students; PBL group = 805, control group = 794) found "a significant difference in skill scores (SMD = 1.46, 95%CI [0.89, 2.02], P < 0.001) in favor of PBL". Heterogeneity was high (I2 = 96%).

"The analytical results showed a significant difference in skill scores (SMD = 1.46, 95%CI [0.89, 2.02], P < 0.001) in favor of PBL, compared with the traditional teaching (Fig. 4)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.