Effectiveness of mobile cooperation intervention on students’ clinical learning outcomes: A randomized controlled trial

Purpose Previous studies have rarely attempted to test the confounding factors that may affect learning outcomes of the flipped classroom. The purpose of this study was to assess how flipped classrooms affect the acquisition of knowledge in clinical dental education based on multilevel factor analysis. Method The authors conducted a 3-year (2017, 2018, and 2019) randomized controlled trial in a series of introductory prosthodontics courses in dental education. A total of 137 participants were randomly assigned to flipped classroom (n = 70, 51%) or lecture (n = 67, 49%) formats. The flipped group was instructed to self-learn knowledge-based content through online preparation materials, including videos and text, while the lecture group was given text only. Both groups were provided with the same study content and opportunities for different styles of learning. The session attendance rate and number of times the materials were accessed were monitored. Individual and team readiness assurance tests (IRAT/TRAT) were conducted to evaluate knowledge acquisition. A multilevel linear regression analysis was conducted on both instructional styles (flipped vs. lecture) as an intervention factor, and confounding factors that could affect the outcomes were implemented. Results The average number of online accesses was 2.5 times per session in the flipped group and 1.2 in the lecture group, with a significant difference (p < .05). The average IRAT score was significantly higher in the flipped than in the lecture group (effect size [ES] 0.58, p < .001). The number of online accesses was significantly and positively correlated with IRAT scores (0.6 [0.4, 0.8]). The instructional style was significantly and positively correlated with TRAT scores (coefficient [95% confidence interval]: 4.6 [2.0, 7.3]), but it was not correlated with IRAT (4.3 [-0.45, 9.0]). Conclusions The flipped classroom was more effective than the lecture format regarding knowledge acquisition; however, the decisive factor was not the instructional style but the number of individual learning occasions. The employment of the flipped classroom was the decisive factor for team-based learning outcomes.

Download Full-text

Clinical learning experiences of nursing students using an innovative clinical partnership model: A non-randomized controlled trial

Nurse Education Today ◽

10.1016/j.nedt.2018.06.001 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 68 ◽

pp. 121-127 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Aileen W.K. Chan ◽

Fiona W.K. Tang ◽

Kai Chow Choi ◽

Ting Liu ◽

Ruth E. Taylor-Piliae

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Nursing Students ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Learning Experiences ◽

Clinical Learning ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Partnership Model

Download Full-text

Effect of Debriefing Based on the Clinical Judgment Model on Simulation Based Learning Outcomes of End-of-Life Care for Nursing Students: A Non-Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing ◽

10.4040/jkan.2017.47.6.842 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 47 (6) ◽

pp. 842 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kyung In Jeong ◽

Ja Yun Choi

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Nursing Students ◽

End Of Life ◽

Learning Outcomes ◽

Clinical Judgment ◽

End Of Life Care ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Life Care ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Simulation Based

Download Full-text

Reciprocal Learning with Task Cards for Teaching Basic Life Support (BLS): Investigating Effectiveness and the Effect of Instructor Expertise on Learning Outcomes. A Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal of Emergency Medicine ◽

10.1016/j.jemermed.2013.04.034 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 46 (1) ◽

pp. 85-94 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Peter Iserbyt ◽

Liesbet Mols ◽

Nathalie Charlier ◽

Sophie De Meester

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Learning Outcomes ◽

Basic Life Support ◽

Life Support ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Reciprocal Learning ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

Treatment Fidelity Procedures for an Aphasia Intervention Within a Randomized Controlled Trial: Design, Feasibility, and Results

American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology ◽

10.1044/2019_ajslp-cac48-18-0227 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 29 (1S) ◽

pp. 412-424

Author(s):

Elissa L. Conlon ◽

Emily J. Braun ◽

Edna M. Babbitt ◽

Leora R. Cherney

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Treatment Protocol ◽

Treatment Fidelity ◽

Protocol Adherence ◽

Study Condition ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Aphasia Therapy ◽

Percent Accuracy ◽

Over Time

Purpose This study reports on the treatment fidelity procedures implemented during a 5-year randomized controlled trial comparing intensive and distributed comprehensive aphasia therapy. Specifically, the results of 1 treatment, verb network strengthening treatment (VNeST), are examined. Method Eight participants were recruited for each of 7 consecutive cohorts for a total of 56 participants. Participants completed 60 hr of aphasia therapy, including 15 hr of VNeST. Two experienced speech-language pathologists delivered the treatment. To promote treatment fidelity, the study team developed a detailed manual of procedures and fidelity checklists, completed role plays to standardize treatment administration, and video-recorded all treatment sessions for review. To assess protocol adherence during treatment delivery, trained research assistants not involved in the treatment reviewed video recordings of a subset of randomly selected VNeST treatment sessions and completed the fidelity checklists. This process was completed for 32 participants representing 2 early cohorts and 2 later cohorts, which allowed for measurement of protocol adherence over time. Percent accuracy of protocol adherence was calculated across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition (intensive vs. distributed therapy). Results The fidelity procedures were sufficient to promote and verify a high level of adherence to the treatment protocol across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition. Conclusion Treatment fidelity strategies and monitoring are feasible when incorporated into the study design. Treatment fidelity monitoring should be completed at regular intervals during the course of a study to ensure that high levels of protocol adherence are maintained over time and across conditions.

Download Full-text

Phonomotor Versus Semantic Feature Analysis Treatment for Anomia in 58 Persons With Aphasia: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research ◽

10.1044/2019_jslhr-l-18-0257 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 62 (12) ◽

pp. 4464-4482 ◽

Cited By ~ 9

Author(s):

Diane L. Kendall ◽

Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽

Wesley Allen ◽

Janaki Torrence ◽

Stephen E. Nadeau

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Response Latency ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Semantic Knowledge ◽

Semantic Feature ◽

Feature Analysis ◽

Group Differences ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Confrontation Naming ◽

Semantic Feature Analysis

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.

Download Full-text