Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Medical education involves the acquisition of a large quantity of information. Lecture-based learning (LBL) is the best known of conventional teaching methods. Two thirds of critical care junior doctors identified at best only one of the three main take-home messages of a lecture, suggesting that knowledge transfer is poor during passive format learning.
The investigators assess the impact of an intervention including the identification of take-home message of lecture with slides calling "Learning Objectives", "Message", "Conclusion", in the identification of take-home message in critical care junior doctors.
Medical education involves the acquisition of a large quantity of information. Lecture-based learning (LBL) is the best known of conventional teaching methods. The main purpose of a lecture is knowledge transfer [1] and its great advantage is that of transferring knowledge from one individual to several or many. Knowledge transfer via LBL is still widely used in international medical congresses, in continuing medical education online via downloading of lectures offered by leading medical schools, and in postgraduate medical education in several countries. We showed that in prospective study of 13 lectures that two thirds of critical care junior doctors identified at best only one of the three main take-home messages of a lecture, suggesting that knowledge transfer is poor during passive format learning.
In this study, we assess the impact of an intervention including the identification of take-home message of lecture with slides calling "Learning Objectives", "Message", "Conclusion", in the identification of take-home message in critical care junior doctors.
6 lectures are performed by professor without specific orders. 6 lectures are performed by professor with the intervention. Both groups of professors do not know this study The critical care juniors do not know the intervention. We compare the take-home messages of students with those of lecturer, 1 month after the lecture.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Take-Home message |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| identification of take-home message of lecture | Procedure |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of match lecturer's take home message | 1 month after the lecture |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Measure of correct responses to multiple choice-questions | 1 month after the lecture |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
French juniors
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Alexandre LAUTRETTE | University Hospital, Clermont-Ferrand | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHU Clermont-Ferrand | Clermont-Ferrand | 63003 | France |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 32493318 | Derived | Lautrette A, Boyer A, Gruson D, Argaud L, Schwebel C, Tardy B, Vignon P, Megarbane B, Schoeffler P, Chabrot P, Schmidt J, Boirie Y, Guerin C, Darmon M, Klouche K, Souweine B, Dellamonica J, Pereira B; TREX group. 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 Med Educ. 2020 Jun 3;20(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s12909-020-02092-7. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided