Video review improves knowledge and skills outcomes (Kirkpatrick level 2), with mixed findings across studies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? At Kirkpatrick level 2, some studies found significant pre-post differences favouring video review while others found minimal or no differences in knowledge and skill scores. → Robbrecht M 2025

Evidence¶

Robbrecht M 2025¶

Robbrecht M, Van Winckel M, Mulder A, Embo M. (2025). What is the learning effect of video review in postgraduate medical education: a systematic review. BMC Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06515-7

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports on Goldberg et al.'s RCT of GPs in training using a psychiatric screening questionnaire: "Significant differences in favour of video review were observed when comparing pre- and post-test scores between the index and control groups." Contrast with Isreb et al., where only two of 10 video reviews added one point on a 10-point scale, and Mazer et al., who found no questionnaire differences.

"Significant differences in favour of video review were observed when comparing pre- and post-test scores between the index and control groups."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Improvements in objective knowledge outcomes (Kirkpatrick Level 2) from technology-enhanced learning were inconsistent across neuroanatomy interventions — related
• In anaesthesia education, e-learning shows no consistent benefit over traditional learning across trials — a broader claim this one bears on
• Across Kirkpatrick Levels 1 and 2, most studies found no statistically significant differences between observer and active participant roles in simulation-based education — related