Sun, Apr 27, 2025
[Archive]
Volume 18, Issue 1 (2025)
JMED 2025, 18(1): 123-131 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IEC/2023/06, dated 16.10.23
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Chattopadhyay S. An analytic study of knowledge retention at different time intervals among junior residents following recapitulation of presented slides silently at the end of teaching session. JMED 2025; 18 (1) :123-131
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-2151-en.html
URL: http://edujournal.zums.ac.ir/article-1-2151-en.html
Department of Anaesthesiology, Midnapore Medical College, Midnapore, West Bengal, India. , sumanc24@gmail.com
Abstract: (185 Views)
Background & Objective: Facilitators commonly ponder how to effectively conclude a learning session, and there are no clear answers. This novel study analyzes the impact of silent recapitulation of presented slides at session end on immediate and short-term knowledge retention among Junior Residents (JR) tested at different time intervals.
Materials & Methods: This single-center, prospective, non-randomized interventional study was conducted at Midnapore Medical College in India. Fifteen postgraduate JR of Anaesthesiology attended 14 knowledge-based teaching sessions, while 22 JR participated in the subsequent 14 sessions. Teaching sessions were allocated in a sequential, non-randomized manner, with 50% of sessions ending with a silent recapitulation of PowerPoint slides following Take-Home Messages (THM) (Study group, n = 14 sessions), while the other 50% of sessions ended with a discussion of THM only (Control group, n = 14 sessions). All participating JRs were assessed with five different Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) each on the first and seventh day after sessions and again at Internal Assessment (IA) after 2 months. Data analysis was performed using paired t-tests for within-group comparisons, unpaired two-tailed t-tests, and ANOVA tests for between-group comparisons.
Results: The MCQ scores on day 1 were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group (82.0 vs. 65.2, p < 0.00). However, mean MCQ scores on day 7 in both groups were significantly different from day 1 MCQ scores but similar to each other (71.2 and 73.5, p = 0.29). The scores at IA improved from day 7 MCQ scores in both the study group (71.2 vs. 82.0, p < 0.05) and the control group (73.5 vs. 83.2, p < 0.05).
Conclusion: For JRs, there is significant short-term retention of knowledge after a silent recapitulation of slides at the end of a session compared to the control group.
Materials & Methods: This single-center, prospective, non-randomized interventional study was conducted at Midnapore Medical College in India. Fifteen postgraduate JR of Anaesthesiology attended 14 knowledge-based teaching sessions, while 22 JR participated in the subsequent 14 sessions. Teaching sessions were allocated in a sequential, non-randomized manner, with 50% of sessions ending with a silent recapitulation of PowerPoint slides following Take-Home Messages (THM) (Study group, n = 14 sessions), while the other 50% of sessions ended with a discussion of THM only (Control group, n = 14 sessions). All participating JRs were assessed with five different Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) each on the first and seventh day after sessions and again at Internal Assessment (IA) after 2 months. Data analysis was performed using paired t-tests for within-group comparisons, unpaired two-tailed t-tests, and ANOVA tests for between-group comparisons.
Results: The MCQ scores on day 1 were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group (82.0 vs. 65.2, p < 0.00). However, mean MCQ scores on day 7 in both groups were significantly different from day 1 MCQ scores but similar to each other (71.2 and 73.5, p = 0.29). The scores at IA improved from day 7 MCQ scores in both the study group (71.2 vs. 82.0, p < 0.05) and the control group (73.5 vs. 83.2, p < 0.05).
Conclusion: For JRs, there is significant short-term retention of knowledge after a silent recapitulation of slides at the end of a session compared to the control group.
Keywords: Junior resident, slide presentation, multiple-choice questions, knowledge retention, teaching strategies
Article Type : Orginal Research |
Subject:
Medical Education
Received: 2024/03/30 | Accepted: 2025/01/27 | Published: 2025/01/27
Received: 2024/03/30 | Accepted: 2025/01/27 | Published: 2025/01/27
References
1. Harolds JA. Tips for giving a memorable presentation, Part IV: Using and composing PowerPoint slides. Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 2012;37(10):977-80. [DOI]
2. Naegle KM. Ten simple rules for effective presentation slides. PLoS Computational Biology. 2021;17(12):e1009554. [DOI]
3. Blome C, Sondermann H, Augustin M. Accepted standards on how to give a medical research presentation: a systematic review of expert opinion papers. GMS Journal for Medical Education. 2017;34(1):Doc11. [DOI]
4. Augustin M. How to learn effectively in medical school: test yourself, learn actively, and repeat in intervals. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. 2014;87:207‐12.
Augustin M. How to learn effectively in medical school: test yourself, learn actively, and repeat in intervals. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. 2014;87:207‐12.
5. Greving, S, Lenhard W, Richter T. The testing effect in university teaching: using multiple-choice testing to promote retention of highly retrievable information. Teaching of Psychology. 2023; 50(4), 332-41.
5. Greving, S, Lenhard W, Richter T. The testing effect in university teaching: using multiple-choice testing to promote retention of highly retrievable information. Teaching of Psychology. 2023; 50(4), 332-41. [DOI]
6. Sharma S, Sharma V, Sharma M, Awasthi B, Chaudhary S. Formative assessment in postgraduate medical education - perceptions of students and teachers. International Journal of Applied and Basic Medical Research. 2015;5(Suppl 1):S 66-70. [DOI]
7. Lautrette, A, Boyer, A, Gruson, D. et al. Impact of take-home messages written into slide presentations delivered during lectures on the retention of messages and the residents’ knowledge: a randomized controlled study. BMC Medical Education. 2020; 20:180. [DOI]
8. Brysbaert M. How many words do we read per minute? A review and meta-analysis of reading rate. Journal of Memory and Language. 2019;109:104047. [DOI]
9. Yang BW, Razo J, Persky AM. Using testing as a learning tool. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2019;83(9):7324. [DOI]
10. Vegi VA, Sudhakar PV, Bhimarasetty DM, et al. Multiple-choice questions in assessment: Perceptions of medical students from low-resource setting. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2022;11(1):103. [DOI]
11. Bachu VS, Mahjoub H, Holler AE, et al. Assessing covid-19 health information on google using the quality evaluation scoring tool (QUEST): cross-sectional and readability analysis. JMIR Formative Research. 2022;6(2):e32443. [DOI]
12. Liu Q, Wald N, Daskon C, Harland, T. Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) for higher-order cognition: perspectives of university teachers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2023; 61(4): 802–14. [DOI]
13. Yeh DD, Park YS. Improving learning efficiency of factual knowledge in medical education. Journal of Surgical Education. 2015;72(5):882-9. [DOI]
14. Frey A, Leutritz T, Backhaus J, Hörnlein A, König S. Item format statistics and readability of extended matching questions as an effective tool to assess medical students. Scientific Reports. 2022;12(1):20982. [DOI]
15. Competency Based Medical Education(CBME) Curriculum Guidelines, 2024 of National Medical Commission of India. Available from: [DOI]
16. Wang M, Jiang L, Luo H. Dyads or quads? Impact of group size and learning context on collaborative learning. Frontiers in Psychology. 2023;14:1168208. [DOI]
17. Nair GG, Feroze M. Effectiveness of multiple-choice questions (MCQS) discussion as a learning enhancer in conventional lecture class of undergraduate medical students. Medical Journal of Dr. DY Patil University.
2023 Jun 2. [DOI]
18. Abdulla MH, O'Sullivan E. The impact of supplementing powerpoint with detailed notes and explanatory videos on student attendance and performance in a physiology module in medicine. Medical Science Educator. 2019;29(4):959-68. [DOI]
19. Binks S. Testing enhances learning: a review of the literature. Journal of Professional Nursing. 2018;34(3):205-10. [DOI]
20. Roediger HL 3, Butler AC. The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011 Jan;15(1):20-7. [DOI]
21. Ryan A, Judd T, Swanson D, Larsen DP, Elliott S, Tzanetos K, Kulasegaram K. Beyond right or wrong: more effective feedback for formative multiple-choice tests. Perspectives on Medical Education. 2020;9:307-13. [DOI]
22. Guzzardo MT, Khosla N, Adams AL, et al. The ones that care make all the difference: perspectives on student-faculty relationships. Innovative Higher Education. 2021;46(1):41-58. [DOI]
23. Badali, S. Rawson KA, Dunlosky J. How do students regulate their use of multiple choice practice tests? Educational Psychology Review. 2023;35:43 [DOI]
24. Keyworth C, Hart J, Armitage CJ, Tully MP. What maximizes the effectiveness and implementation of technology-based interventions to support healthcare professional practice? A systematic literature review. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2018;18:1-21. [DOI]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
