Comparing the Effect of Video-cases and Text-cases on Medical Students' Learning in Tutorial

January 27, 2011 updated by: Harvard University Faculty of Medicine

A Randomized Crossover Study to Compare the Critical Thinking of Medical Students When Using Video-based or Written Cases

This study is designed to examine how the type of learning case affects the thinking of medical students in tutorial

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Tutorials at Harvard Medical School use problem-based learning with written cases. Students work in groups under the supervision of a tutor who guides their exploration of the material. As students progress through the curriculum there is an opportunity to advance the complexity of the material they are presented with. Video-based patient case studies have been shown to improve critical thinking ratios in paediatric medical student problem-based learning exercises, and time spent on data exploration, theory building and theory evaluation in postgraduate residency programs. We hypothesize that video provides a stimulus that improves cognitive processing and critical thinking among medical students, as compared to working from the text-based transcript of the same case.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

28

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Massachusetts
      • Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02115
        • Harvard Medical School

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 65 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • medical student participating in the endocrine and reproductive pathophysiology course at Harvard Medical School

Exclusion Criteria:

  • None

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Health Services Research
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Video modality
Patients whose case histories are pathophysiologically illustrative will be recruited, and interviewed on video. Their stories will be edited and divided into sections, and combined with the patient's laboratory, imaging, and pathological reports when appropriate
Active Comparator: Text modality
Patients whose case histories are pathophysiologically illustrative will be recruited, and interviewed on video. Their stories will be edited and divided into sections, and combined with the patient's laboratory, imaging, and pathological reports when appropriate. The transcript of these video-recordings will form the basis of the text-based case presentation modality.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Overall ratio of deep to superficial thinking
Time Frame: Four 90-minute tutorial sessions
Depth of thinking will be evaluated using the method of Kamin et al. Transcription of each tutorial will be divided into utterances. Each utterance will be coded for depth of thinking (deep vs. superficial). The ratio of deep to superficial thinking by case modality will be reported.
Four 90-minute tutorial sessions

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Distribution of learning activities
Time Frame: Four 90-min tutorial sessions
Transcription of each tutorial will be divided into utterances. Each utterance will be coded by learning domain (identification, description, exploration, integration, and application. The distribution of domains by case modality will be reported.
Four 90-min tutorial sessions
Preferences of students for each case modality
Time Frame: 5 weeks
Students will be surveyed regarding their preferences for video- vs. text-based case presentation modality using a Likert-scale
5 weeks
Preferences of tutors for each case modality
Time Frame: 5 weeks
Tutors will be surveyed regarding their preferences for video- vs. text-based case presentation modality using a Likert-scale
5 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Graham T McMahon, MD MMSc, Harvard Medical School (HMS and HSDM)

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

February 1, 2008

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2009

Study Completion (Actual)

February 1, 2009

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 27, 2011

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 27, 2011

First Posted (Estimate)

January 31, 2011

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

January 31, 2011

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 27, 2011

Last Verified

January 1, 2011

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • M15700-101

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Problem-based Learning

Clinical Trials on video case modality

3
Subscribe