Applying team-based learning of diagnostics for undergraduate students: assessing teaching effectiveness by a randomized controlled trial study

Figures & data

Figure 1 Schematic diagram of research method.

Abbreviations: TBL, team-based learning; LBL, lecture-based learning.

Figure 2 Schematic diagram of team-based learning method.

Table 1 Baseline student characteristics

Groups	Age	Gender (male/female)	Anatomy	Pathophysiology	Pathology
TBL group (n=55)	20.02±0.62	28/27	79.64±10.31	80.00±11.67	79.67±11.58
Control group (n=56)	19.96±0.63	29/27	80.02±10.3	78.82±10.79	78.91±11.17
t or χ^2 value	0.452	0.009	−0.195	0.553	0.353
p-Value	0.652	0.926	0.846	0.582	0.725
95% CI	−0.182 to 0.290	–	−4.260 to 3.496	−3.048 to 5.405	−3.517 to 5.041

Note: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation unless stated otherwise.

Abbreviations: TBL, team-based learning; CI, confidence interval.

Table 2 IRAT-baseline, GRAT, ITT1, and ITT2 scores between two groups

Groups	IRAT-baseline	GRAT	ITT1	ITT2
TBL group (n=55)	16.56±3.89	25.00±1.05#	19.85±4.20#	19.15±3.93#,*
Control group (n=56)	–	–	19.70±4.61	17.46±4.65◦
t value	–	–	0.189	2.057
p-Value	–	–	0.851	0.042
95% CI	–	–	−1.501 to 1.817	0.061 to 3.301

Notes: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation unless stated otherwise. Compared with control group,

* p<0.05; compared with IRAT-baseline,

# p<0.001; compared with ITT1,

◦ p<0.05.

Abbreviations: IRAT-baseline, Individual Readiness Assurance Test-baseline; GRAT, Group Readiness Assurance Test; IIT1, Individual Terminal Test 1; IIT2, Individual Terminal Test 2; TBL, team-based learning; CI, confidence interval.

Table 3 IRAT-baseline, ITT1, and ITT2 scores in each subgroups of TBL

Groups	IRAT-baseline	ITT1	ITT2	ITT1-IRAT-baseline	ITT2-IRAT-baseline
A subgroup (n=18)	21.38±1.26#,△	24.38±1.41#,△	23.50±1.03#,△	3.00±1.59	2.13±1.15
B subgroup (n=19)	15.74±2.80*,△	19.22±3.69*,△	18.52±3.46*,△	3.48±2.15	2.78±2.37
C subgroup (n=18)	12.94±1.24*,#	16.25±2.27*,#	15.69±1.82*,#	3.31±1.58	2.75±1.39
F value	70.767	34.792	39.782	0.318	0.711
p-Value	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.729	0.500

Notes: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation unless stated otherwise. Compared with A subgroup,

* p<0.05; compared with B subgroup,

# p<0.05; compared with C subgroup,

△ p<0.05.

Abbreviations: IRAT-baseline, Individual Readiness Assurance Test-baseline; IIT1, Individual Terminal Test 1; IIT2, Individual Terminal Test 2; TBL, team-based learning.

Table 4 Students’ feedback on the teaching model

Items	Score $(\overline{x}\pm s)$	Percentage responding as “≥4” N (%)
1. TBL stimulates interest in learning	4.09±0.70	44 (80)
2. TBL is helpful in self-directed learning	4.07±0.90	43 (78.18)
3. TBL improves the ability to analyze and solve problems	3.76±1.05	33 (60)
4. TBL improves expression ability	3.65±1.06	34 (61.82)
5. TBL practices cooperation and communications skills	3.85±0.93	35 (63.64)
6. I have benefited from learning with other students	3.51±1.14	32 (58.18)
7. I have benefited from teachings by TBL teachers	4.00±0.92	40 (72.73)
8. TBL teaching is more fragmented and less systemic	4.00±0.75	42 (76.36)
9. TBL causes an increased workload	3.80±0.91	36 (65.45)
10. More TBL will be used in the future	3.73±1.04	36 (65.45)

Abbreviation: TBL, team-based learning.

Table 5 Learning times spent between the two groups

Groups	Before class (minutes)	After class (minutes)
TBL group	91.09±45.11*	90.45±37.1*
Control group	26.61±11.91	41.16±18.36
t value	10.256	8.847
p-Value	0.000	0.000
95% CI	51.913–77.055	38.203–60.385

Notes: Data presented as mean ± standard deviation unless stated otherwise. Compared with control group,

* p<0.05.

Abbreviations: TBL, team-based learning; CI, confidence interval.