Knowledge Retention Using "Relay": A Novel Active-Learning Technique.

PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) Pub Date : 2022-06-01 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.22454/PRiMER.2022.586676
Kathryn Freeman, Kathryn Brown, Laura Miller, Tanner Nissly, Jason Ricco, Amanda Weinmann
{"title":"Knowledge Retention Using \"Relay\": A Novel Active-Learning Technique.","authors":"Kathryn Freeman,&nbsp;Kathryn Brown,&nbsp;Laura Miller,&nbsp;Tanner Nissly,&nbsp;Jason Ricco,&nbsp;Amanda Weinmann","doi":"10.22454/PRiMER.2022.586676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Many residency programs utilize passive didactic lectures despite mixed evidence for knowledge retention. This prospective study investigated the efficacy of \"relay,\" an active-learning technique, as measured by residents' knowledge retention and attitudes compared to traditional format.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Faculty presented lectures to four family medicine residency programs on a randomized schedule. Lectures were followed by a 15-minute question-and-answer (Q&A) session or relay session. A relay is a collaborative, question-based game. The primary outcome was knowledge retention at 3 months, comparing Q&A to relay sessions as measured by a multiple-choice assessment. Responses were only included if a given resident completed knowledge assessments for both Q&A and relay sessions, to allow for intraresident adjustments, in addition to program, training year, and lecturer/topic. Secondary outcomes included residents' self-perceived knowledge and engagement as surveyed by an ordinal scale immediately following the learning session.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The primary analysis included 51 responses from 18 unique residents. The adjusted mean knowledge assessment score at 3 months was not statistically different after the relay sessions compared to Q&A (67% vs 60%, respectively; 7% difference, 95% CI: -4 to 18%, <i>P</i>=.20). For the secondary outcomes of learner attitudes (n=143 responses), learners reported greater engagement after the relay sessions compared to Q&A (51% vs 28% \"very engaged\"; overall <i>P</i>=.003), but self-perceived knowledge was not significantly different (overall <i>P</i>=.05, rounded down).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The relay technique did not show significant difference in 3-month knowledge retention, nor immediate self-perceived knowledge, despite greater learner self-perceived engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":74494,"journal":{"name":"PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)","volume":" ","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9256294/pdf/primer-6-12.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22454/PRiMER.2022.586676","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Many residency programs utilize passive didactic lectures despite mixed evidence for knowledge retention. This prospective study investigated the efficacy of "relay," an active-learning technique, as measured by residents' knowledge retention and attitudes compared to traditional format.

Methods: Faculty presented lectures to four family medicine residency programs on a randomized schedule. Lectures were followed by a 15-minute question-and-answer (Q&A) session or relay session. A relay is a collaborative, question-based game. The primary outcome was knowledge retention at 3 months, comparing Q&A to relay sessions as measured by a multiple-choice assessment. Responses were only included if a given resident completed knowledge assessments for both Q&A and relay sessions, to allow for intraresident adjustments, in addition to program, training year, and lecturer/topic. Secondary outcomes included residents' self-perceived knowledge and engagement as surveyed by an ordinal scale immediately following the learning session.

Results: The primary analysis included 51 responses from 18 unique residents. The adjusted mean knowledge assessment score at 3 months was not statistically different after the relay sessions compared to Q&A (67% vs 60%, respectively; 7% difference, 95% CI: -4 to 18%, P=.20). For the secondary outcomes of learner attitudes (n=143 responses), learners reported greater engagement after the relay sessions compared to Q&A (51% vs 28% "very engaged"; overall P=.003), but self-perceived knowledge was not significantly different (overall P=.05, rounded down).

Conclusions: The relay technique did not show significant difference in 3-month knowledge retention, nor immediate self-perceived knowledge, despite greater learner self-perceived engagement.

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
基于“中继”的知识保留:一种新的主动学习技术。
导言:许多住院医师项目利用被动的教学讲座,尽管有不同的证据表明知识保留。本前瞻性研究考察了主动学习技术“接力”的有效性,通过与传统形式相比,居民的知识保留和态度来衡量。方法:教师对四个家庭医学住院医师项目进行随机安排的讲座。讲座之后是15分钟的提问和回答(Q&A)环节或接力环节。接力赛是一种基于问题的协作游戏。主要结果是3个月时的知识保留情况,通过多项选择评估来比较问答和接力环节。只有当一个给定的住院医师完成了问答和接力环节的知识评估,除了项目、培训年份和讲师/主题之外,还允许住院医师进行内部调整时,才会包括回答。次要结果包括居民的自我认知知识和参与,在学习课程后立即通过顺序量表进行调查。结果:初步分析包括来自18位独特居民的51份回复。接力赛后3个月的调整后平均知识评估得分与问答后比较无统计学差异(分别为67% vs 60%;差异为7%,95% CI: -4 ~ 18%, P=.20)。对于学习者态度的次要结果(n=143个回答),与问答相比,学习者在中继会话后报告了更高的参与度(51%对28%“非常投入”;总体P=.003),但自我感知知识差异无统计学意义(总体P=.003)。05,四舍五入)。结论:中继技术在3个月的知识保留和即时自我感知知识方面没有显著差异,尽管学习者自我感知参与程度更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Starting the Conversation: Patient Perceptions of Self-Assessed Type-2 Diabetes Risk. Use of AI in Family Medicine Publications: A Joint Editorial From Journal Editors. Beyond the Workshop: Advancing Antiracist Medical Education. Contextualizing COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in the Broader Vaccination Debate. Integrating Bias Reduction Into Medical Teaching Cases: Addressing the Overrepresentation of Skin of Color Images in Infectious Disease and Sexually Transmitted Infection Cases.
×
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