Claims

Most studies report positive student satisfaction with TBL in clinical disciplines, but firm conclusions are limited by uncontrolled designs

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
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.

q2 i? Thirty-one of 34 studies reporting satisfaction found positive attitudes toward TBL or high satisfaction. → Sterpu Irene 2024 q2 i? More than half of the satisfaction studies had no comparator, and three studies showed no difference or lower satisfaction with TBL. → Sterpu Irene 2024

Evidence

Sterpu Irene 2024

Sterpu Irene, Herling Lotta, Nordquist Jonas, Rotgans Jerome, Acharya Ganesh. (2024). Team-based learning (TBL) in clinical disciplines for undergraduate medical students—a scoping review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04975-x

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review's synthesis of the satisfaction outcome (34 studies, 21 with comparators, 13 without) reports positive self-reported attitudes in 31 studies; the authors state it is difficult to draw firm conclusions because of the uncontrolled designs and three contrasting studies.

"Thirty-one of the studies reported that students had positive attitudes toward TBL and a high level of satisfaction with the TBL sessions or that TBL facilitated deeper learning, was better at fulfilling learning objectives, or was a valuable experience according to students’ self-reporting."

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.