bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

bioRxiv · 10.1101/2021.04.19.440394

An Evaluation of Curriculum change in Physiology: A Mixed method research design

Abstract

IntroductionThe quality of both teaching and learning techniques in health sciences determines the competency of the doctors produced and the patient care. Realizing the necessity of active learning at the undergraduate level, curricular reforms were crucial to ensure that students play an active role in the learning process and imbibe all the prerequisite qualities of a competent health professional. The objective of this study was to implement and evaluate case-based learning in the physiology curriculum. MethodsThe study included 150 first-year MBBS students. We followed a mixed research design in this study. A short lecture on anemia was followed by two sessions of CBL with a gap of one week. A structured questionnaire on a 5-point Likert scale was used to collect students perceptions. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was Cronbach -statistic = 0.8. Faculties feedback was collected through Focus Group Discussion (FGD). ResultsOut of 145 participants, 117 responded to feedback. Students perceived that the CBL method was effective in understanding anemia topic (71%); promoted meaningful learning (83%); encouraged teamwork (69%); improved communication skills (65%); helps in future application of knowledge (81%); motivated self-directed learning (66%); helped to understand physiology concepts better (72%); leads to the development of problem-solving abilities (70%); and better student-teacher relationship (72%). Faculties suggested developing an assessment plan for future CBL sessions. ConclusionIn our experience, CBL is an effective, active teaching-learning tool that improves students understanding of basic concepts, clinical knowledge, problem-solving abilities, teamwork, communication skills, student-teacher relationship, and self-directed learning.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Teli, S. S., M, S. v., K, S., Velusami, D., K, S. s., S, M. M.. 2021-04-20. An Evaluation of Curriculum change in Physiology: A Mixed method research design. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.19.440394

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related preprints

Evaluating Large Language Models as Tools to Navigate Researchers in Rapidly Evolving Research Landscapes: A Case Study in Cancer Drug Response Prediction

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising tools for assisting researchers in automating and accelerating the synthesis of literature reviews. However, their reliability is a significant concern due to issues like factual inaccuracies and hallucinations. The key question is whether LLMs can reliably provide comprehensive, up-to-date overviews and analyses. This study evaluates the performance of three leading LLMs (OpenAI's ChatGPT, Google's Gemini, and DeepSeek) on the complex task of generating a comprehensive survey paper on deep learning for cancer Drug Response Prediction (DRP). By testing both standard and Deep Research (DR) / Deep Think (DT) modes of LLMs with prompts of varying detail, this paper assesses key academic dimensions, including reference management, content quality, and analytical depth. Key findings reveal that while DR modes of LLMs significantly improve reliability by eliminating hallucinations, performance variations exist across models and prompts. A trade-off between reference quantity and integration quality was observed, and even the best-performing models lacked the analytical depth of human experts, often requiring extensive human supervision. The study concludes that LLMs currently serve as powerful assistive tools but still cannot replace the critical validation and synthesis provided by human researchers. Choosing the best LLM to use depends on the task in hand, while several strategies can be implemented to improve the produced output.

scientific communication and education↗

Welfare concerns for mounted load carrying by working donkeys in Pakistan

Working donkeys (Equus asinus) are vital to peoples livelihoods. They are essential for carrying goods, however globally, overloading is one of the primary welfare concerns of working donkeys. We studied mounted load carrying by donkeys and associated factors in Pakistan. A cross-sectional study of donkey owners (n = 332) was conducted, and interviews were undertaken based on a questionnaire. Owners estimated that the median weight of their donkeys was 110kg (interquartile range (IQR) 100-120kg), and that they carried a median mounted load of 81.5kg (IQR 63-99kg). We found that 87.4% of donkeys carried a load above 50% of their bodyweight ratio (BWR), the median BWR carried was 77.1% (IQR 54.5-90.7%), and 25.3% of donkeys carried above 90% BWR. Donkeys that were loaded at more than 50% BWR were more likely to sit, compared to donkeys loaded with less weight (p=0.01). Donkeys working in peri-urban and urban areas were more likely to carry a greater BWR than donkeys working in rural areas (P<0.001), as were those carrying construction materials or bricks, compared to agricultural materials (p=0.004). Age (p=0.03) and breed (p=0.01) were also associated with carrying a higher weight. Overloading based on current recommendations (50% BWR) was common, with the majority (87.4%) of donkeys reported to carry more than the recommended 50% limit. This survey provides evidence of on-the-ground working practices and factors associated with mounted load carrying, which is critical for developing evidence-based recommendations for loading, in order to improve the welfare of working donkeys.

scientific communication and education↗