Skip to content

Study, 2014

Does team-based learning help medical students understand PMS and related conditions?

Medical students in teams scored much higher on tests (averaging 94.33%) than when taking tests individually (averaging 72.80%), though they found applying the knowledge to complex cases harder (averaging 53.33%).

Moderate study design 147 obstetrics and gynecology medical students in 26 teams

What they did

147 medical students divided into 26 teams participated in a team-based learning module. Students first studied materials on their own, then took an individual written test, then worked in their teams to answer the same test questions, and finally worked through complex case questions as a team.

What they found

Students averaged 72.80% on the individual test (ranging from 53% to 92%). When they worked in teams on the same test, they averaged 94.33% (ranging from 86% to 99%). On the complex application exercise, teams averaged 53.33% (ranging from 60% to 100%).

What it means for you

This shows that medical students learn better when they work together than when working alone. However, this study is about how doctors are trained, not about whether you can actually treat PMS better. The main limitation is that this measures test performance, not whether students actually help patients with PMS differently.

147

medical students

94.33%

average score on team test

72.80%

average score on individual test

About the study

Original title
Team-Based Learning: PMS vs. PMDD, Sexually Transmitted Infections, Pelvic Organ Prolapse and Menopause
Authors
Alice Chuang, Nancy N. Wang, Jeremy Belch
Journal
MedEdPORTAL
Year
2014
Study design
Study
Participants
147
What was tested
Team-based learning teaching module
Open access
Yes
Original abstract

Abstract Introduction This team-based learning (TBL) module instructs obstetrics and gynecology clerkship students on diagnosis and initial management of premenstrual syndrome, premenstrual dysphoric disorder, sexually transmitted infections, pelvic organ prolapse, and menopause. This module is ideally suited for an active learning curriculum in which students are accustomed to preparing ahead of time and working through questions and cases in the classroom. Methods Students arrive at the session having read a series of prereadings. They first take a closed-book individual readiness assurance test (IRAT) to test their grasp of foundational information. They are then grouped into teams of five to seven students to complete the group readiness assurance test (GRAT), which is identical to the IRAT. The students remain in their teams as they complete an application exercise consisting of a case vignette and a number of complex multiple-choice questions. Results To date, 147 students making up 26 teams have completed the TBL module, with an average score of 72.80% (range: 53%-92%) on the IRAT, 94.33% (range: 86%-99%) on the GRAT, and 53.33% (range: 60%-100%) on the application exercise. Discussion We feel that TBL enables students to be more active learners compared to our previous didactic structure featuring PowerPoint-driven lectures. The advantages of this module are that (1) less faculty preparation time is needed, (2) students are actively engaged in application of the material, and (3) no traditional lecturing is required. Students are assessed using multiple-choice questions, and their group interactions are assessed by their peers. This module can be scaled to any size group greater than a minimum of 10 since students form teams of five to seven for the exercise.

Reproduced under CC-BY.

Topics