Claims

TBL and PBL show no significant difference in understanding skills, with a point estimate favoring TBL

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · 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? Three studies assessing understanding skills found no significant difference (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI: -0.11–0.54), with the point estimate in favor of TBL. → Zhang Weilin 2024

Evidence

Zhang Weilin 2024

Zhang Weilin, Wei Jinsong, Guo Weixiong, Wang Zhongwei, Chen Siyuan. (2024). Comparing the effects of team-based and problem-based learning strategies in medical education: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05107-9

q3 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1

Meta-analysis of three studies assessing students' understanding skills, using a fixed-effects model because there was no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, P = 0.436). The pooled "SMD = 0.22" confidence interval crosses zero, so no significant difference was detected despite the point estimate favoring TBL.

"The pooled effect size showed no significant difference in understanding skills (SMD = 0.22, 95% CI: -0.11–0.54) in favor of TBL, compared with PBL"

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.