Claims

Students in TBL groups report higher satisfaction than students in LBL groups

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2026 · 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 i3 Students in the TBL group were more satisfied than those in the LBL group, whether satisfaction was measured continuously or dichotomously. → Fu Jie 2026

Evidence

Fu Jie 2026

Fu Jie, Chen Xiu, Li Jinglun, Peng Lilei. (2026). TBL alone or combined with other teaching methods for neurology education in China: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09468-1

q3 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r2

Meta-analysis of student satisfaction from 10 studies, analyzed separately by data type: 3 studies with continuous data (SMD = 1.17) and 7 studies with dichotomous data (OR = 6.31). Both favored TBL.

"The pooled SMD of satisfaction with continuous data was 1.17 (95% CI: 0.85 to 1.48, p < 0.00001), and the overall OR for satisfaction with dichotomous data was 6.31 (95% CI: 3.58 to 11.12, p < 0.00001)."

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.