Comparing active teaching to hybrid lecture-based method for learning radiology basics: A single center controlled study

Fabien de Oliveira , Jean-Paul Beregi , Hugo Potier , Thorgal Brun , Chris Serrand , Julien Frandon
{"title":"Comparing active teaching to hybrid lecture-based method for learning radiology basics: A single center controlled study","authors":"Fabien de Oliveira ,&nbsp;Jean-Paul Beregi ,&nbsp;Hugo Potier ,&nbsp;Thorgal Brun ,&nbsp;Chris Serrand ,&nbsp;Julien Frandon","doi":"10.1016/j.redii.2025.100054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>There is a lack of knowledge about radiology among medical students at the start of their curriculum. The optimal teaching method for radiological basics remains uncertain. We conducted a controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of full active learning and hybrid lecture-based teaching methods.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>All second-year medical students at Nîmes University Hospital (Nîmes, France) were invited to participate in a training session in the radiology unit. Volunteers were divided into hybrid lecture-based and full active learning groups. The hybrid lecture-based group received a lecture-based session followed by a unit visit, while the full active learning group utilized a structured form with progressive objectives during the visit. Pretests, immediate post-tests, and two-week follow-up tests were conducted. Short-term progression was the primary outcome, with secondary objectives including mid-term acquisition and associated factors.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>51 students participated, with 20 in the hybrid lecture-based group and 31 in the full active learning group. Both groups exhibited significant progression between the first and second tests (+8.48 and +2.52 respectively, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01). The hybrid lecture-based group showed significantly greater mean progression (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.01). Mid-term results indicated score decrease particularly in the hybrid lecture-based group, but it still maintained significantly superior performance (15.02/20 versus 12.33/20 for full active learning group, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The hybrid pedagogical method yielded superior results in teaching second-year medical students the basics of radiology compared to the full active learning teaching method.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74676,"journal":{"name":"Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging","volume":"13 ","pages":"Article 100054"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in diagnostic and interventional imaging","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772652525000018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

There is a lack of knowledge about radiology among medical students at the start of their curriculum. The optimal teaching method for radiological basics remains uncertain. We conducted a controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of full active learning and hybrid lecture-based teaching methods.

Methods

All second-year medical students at Nîmes University Hospital (Nîmes, France) were invited to participate in a training session in the radiology unit. Volunteers were divided into hybrid lecture-based and full active learning groups. The hybrid lecture-based group received a lecture-based session followed by a unit visit, while the full active learning group utilized a structured form with progressive objectives during the visit. Pretests, immediate post-tests, and two-week follow-up tests were conducted. Short-term progression was the primary outcome, with secondary objectives including mid-term acquisition and associated factors.

Results

51 students participated, with 20 in the hybrid lecture-based group and 31 in the full active learning group. Both groups exhibited significant progression between the first and second tests (+8.48 and +2.52 respectively, p < 0.01). The hybrid lecture-based group showed significantly greater mean progression (p < 0.01). Mid-term results indicated score decrease particularly in the hybrid lecture-based group, but it still maintained significantly superior performance (15.02/20 versus 12.33/20 for full active learning group, p < 0.01).

Conclusion

The hybrid pedagogical method yielded superior results in teaching second-year medical students the basics of radiology compared to the full active learning teaching method.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Comparing active teaching to hybrid lecture-based method for learning radiology basics: A single center controlled study Possible limited justification for systematic head computed tomography scans based solely on antithrombotic therapy in elderly patients (aged 75 or older) with mild traumatic brain injury Dedicated software to harmonize the follow-up of oncological patients Glenoid morphology variation between patients with hypermobile shoulder joints and controls: Identification of hyperlaxity-related morphologic bone changes Efficacity of CT-guided intra-articular cervical facet steroid injection for cervical radiculopathy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1