PBL与LBL教学模式在临床见习中应用研究的Meta分析  

Meta-analysis of Study on Problem-based Learning and Lecture-based Learning Applied in Clinical Clerkship

作　　者：郭文萃[1] 许立新[1] 高颖昌[1] 冯伟捷[1] 

机构地区：[1]首都医科大学附属北京天坛医院高干科,北京100050

出　　处：《包头医学院学报》2009年第4期90-92,共3页Journal of Baotou Medical College

摘　　要：目的：运用Meta分析的方法定量评价以问题为基础的学习（PBL）与以讲座为基础的学习（LBL）两种教学模式在临床见习课程中应用效果。方法：检索中国生物医学文献、中文学术期刊全文、PubMed、EBSCO、Cochrane图书馆等数据库近10年发表的有关PBL与LBL教学法在临床见习课程中应用的文献，根据选择标准选取前瞻性的随机对照研究，从基础理论知识和临床实践能力两方面计算合并效应值及其95％a区间。结果：获取基础理论知识方面PBL与LBL合并效应值之间差异无统计学意义（d=1．665，95％CI为-0．016～3．346，P〉0．05）；提高临床实践能力方面合并效应值PBL显著优于LBL（d=4．098，95％CI为1．695～6．501，P〈0．001）。结论：在临床见习课程中应用PBL教学法能够提高学习者临床实践能力。Objective： To evaluate the efficacy of problem--based learning（PBL） and lecture--based learning（LBL） applied in clinical clerkship by using Meta--analysis. Methods： Related studies in recent l0 years were searched through, CNKI, CBMdisc, PubMed, EBSCO and Cochrane library. The randomized control trials meeting the pre--defined criteria were chosen. Outcome measures included participants＂ basic knowledge and the performance of clinical practice. Results： There was no significant difference in the combined effect sizes of the basic knowledge between PBL and LBL（ d = 1. 665, 95% CI 为-0. 016-3. 346, P〉0.05）. However, there was significant difference in those of the performance of clinical practice between PBL and LBL（ d =4. 098, 95% CI 为 1. 695-6. 501, P d0. 001）. Conclusion： PBL in clinical clerkship can facilitate participants＂ performance of the clinical practice.

关 键 词：META分析 以问题为基础的学习 以讲座为基础的学习 临床见习 

分 类 号：R4-4[医药卫生—临床医学]