Anders, Sven

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","245"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","5"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","European Addiction Research"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","251"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","19"],["dc.contributor.author","Krampe, Henning"],["dc.contributor.author","Strobel, Lisa"],["dc.contributor.author","Beard, Emma"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","West, Robert"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:29:36Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:29:36Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","Background/Aims: A minority of German medical students believe they know how to support smokers willing to quit. This paper examined whether the same would be true for treating alcohol use disorder (AUD), and individual factors associated with incorrect beliefs about the effectiveness of methods to treat AUD. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 19,526 undergraduate students from 27 German medical schools completed a survey addressing beliefs about the effectiveness of different methods of overcoming AUD. Beliefs about AUD treatment effectiveness were compared across the 5 years of undergraduate education and predictors identified by means of multiple linear regression. Results: Even in the fifth year, 28.1% (95% CI: 26.5-29.7) of students believed that willpower alone was more effective for overcoming AUD than a comprehensive treatment program. The only significant predictor of this belief was a similar belief for stopping smoking. Conclusion: Our results indicate that a considerable proportion of German medical students overestimate the effectiveness of willpower to treat smoking and AUD. The addictive nature of these disorders needs to be stressed during undergraduate medical education to ensure that future physicians will be able and motivated to support patients in their quit attempts. Copyright (c) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel"],["dc.description.sponsorship","Cancer Research UK [14135]"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1159/000346672"],["dc.identifier.isi","000324908200003"],["dc.identifier.pmid","23428902"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/10821"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/31077"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.relation.issn","1421-9891"],["dc.relation.issn","1022-6877"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","German Medical Students' Beliefs about How Best to Treat Alcohol Use Disorder"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e223"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","9"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Journal of Medical Internet Research"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","17"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Grefe, Clemens"],["dc.contributor.author","Brown, Jamie"],["dc.contributor.author","Meyer, Katharina"],["dc.contributor.author","Schuelper, Nikolai"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:52:19Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:52:19Z"],["dc.date.issued","2015"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Podcasts are popular with medical students, but the impact of podcast use on learning outcomes in undergraduate medical education has not been studied in detail. Objective: Our aim was to assess the impact of podcasts accompanied by quiz questions and lecture attendance on short- and medium-term knowledge retention. Methods: Students enrolled for a cardio-respiratory teaching module were asked to prepare for 10 specific lectures by watching podcasts and submitting answers to related quiz questions before attending live lectures. Performance on the same questions was assessed in a surprise test and a retention test. Results: Watching podcasts and submitting answers to quiz questions (versus no podcast/quiz use) was associated with significantly better test performance in all items in the surprise test and 7 items in the retention test. Lecture attendance (versus no attendance) was associated with higher test performance in 3 items and 1 item, respectively. In a linear regression analysis adjusted for age, gender, and overall performance levels, both podcast/quiz use and lecture attendance were significant predictors of student performance. However, the variance explained by podcast/quiz use was greater than the variance explained by lecture attendance in the surprise test (38.7% vs 2.2%) and retention test (19.1% vs 4.0%). Conclusions: When used in conjunction with quiz questions, podcasts have the potential to foster knowledge acquisition and retention over and above the effect of live lectures."],["dc.description.sponsorship","Faculty of Medicine, Georg-August-University Gottingen"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.2196/jmir.3814"],["dc.identifier.isi","000361810200003"],["dc.identifier.pmid","26416467"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/13578"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/36100"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Jmir Publications, Inc"],["dc.relation.issn","1438-8871"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Moving Knowledge Acquisition From the Lecture Hall to the Student Home: A Prospective Intervention Study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","45"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medical Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","12"],["dc.contributor.author","Schiekirka, Sarah"],["dc.contributor.author","Reinhardt, Deborah"],["dc.contributor.author","Heim, Susanne"],["dc.contributor.author","Fabry, Goetz"],["dc.contributor.author","Pukrop, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:09:11Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:09:11Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Evaluation is an integral part of medical education. Despite a wide use of various evaluation tools, little is known about student perceptions regarding the purpose and desired consequences of evaluation. Such knowledge is important to facilitate interpretation of evaluation results. The aims of this study were to elicit student views on the purpose of evaluation, indicators of teaching quality, evaluation tools and possible consequences drawn from evaluation data. Methods: This qualitative study involved 17 undergraduate medical students in Years 3 and 4 participating in 3 focus group interviews. Content analysis was conducted by two different researchers. Results: Evaluation was viewed as a means to facilitate improvements within medical education. Teaching quality was believed to be dependent on content, process, teacher and student characteristics as well as learning outcome, with an emphasis on the latter. Students preferred online evaluations over paper-and-pencil forms and suggested circulating results among all faculty and students. Students strongly favoured the allocation of rewards and incentives for good teaching to individual teachers. Conclusions: In addition to assessing structural aspects of teaching, evaluation tools need to adequately address learning outcome. The use of reliable and valid evaluation methods is a prerequisite for resource allocation to individual teachers based on evaluation results."],["dc.description.sponsorship","Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2012"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1472-6920-12-45"],["dc.identifier.isi","000306900100001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","22726271"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/7830"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/26199"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Biomed Central Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","1472-6920"],["dc.rights","CC BY 2.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0"],["dc.title","Student perceptions of evaluation in undergraduate medical education: A qualitative study from one medical school"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e13386"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","2"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","JMIR Medical Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","5"],["dc.contributor.author","Schuelper, Nikolai"],["dc.contributor.author","Ludwig, Sascha"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-25T08:29:18Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-25T08:29:18Z"],["dc.date.issued","2019"],["dc.description.abstract","Repeated formative assessments using key feature questions have been shown to enhance clinical reasoning. Key feature questions augmented by videos presenting clinical vignettes may be more effective than text-based questions, especially in a setting where medical students are free to choose the format they would like to work with. This study investigated learning outcomes related to clinical reasoning in students using video- or text-based key feature questions according to their individual preferences."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.2196/13386"],["dc.identifier.pmid","31333193"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/16297"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/62037"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","2369-3762"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","The Impact of Medical Students' Individual Teaching Format Choice on the Learning Outcome Related to Clinical Reasoning"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","189"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medical Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","21"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","de Temple, Insa"],["dc.contributor.author","Middeke, Angélina"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Morton, Caroline"],["dc.contributor.author","Schuelper, Nikolai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-06-01T09:42:15Z"],["dc.date.accessioned","2022-08-18T12:36:29Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-06-01T09:42:15Z"],["dc.date.available","2022-08-18T12:36:29Z"],["dc.date.issued","2021-03-30"],["dc.date.updated","2022-07-29T12:17:19Z"],["dc.description.abstract","Abstract\r\n \r\n Background\r\n Patients presenting with acute shortness of breath and chest pain should be managed according to guideline recommendations. Serious games can be used to train clinical reasoning. However, only few studies have used outcomes beyond student satisfaction, and most of the published evidence is based on short-term follow-up. This study investigated the effectiveness of a digital simulation of an emergency ward regarding appropriate clinical decision-making.\r\n \r\n \r\n Methods\r\n In this prospective trial that ran from summer 2017 to winter 2018/19 at Göttingen Medical University Centre, a total of 178 students enrolled in either the fourth or the fifth year of undergraduate medical education took six 90-min sessions of playing a serious game (‘training phase’) in which they managed virtual patients presenting with various conditions. Learning outcome was assessed by analysing log-files of in-game activity (including choice of diagnostic methods, differential diagnosis and treatment initiation) with regard to history taking and patient management in three virtual patient cases: Non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), pulmonary embolism (PE) and hypertensive crisis. Fourth-year students were followed up for 1.5 years, and their final performance was compared to the performance of students who had never been exposed to the game but had otherwise taken the same five-year undergraduate course.\r\n \r\n \r\n Results\r\n During the training phase, overall performance scores increased from 57.6 ± 1.1% to 65.5 ± 1.2% (p < 0.001; effect size 0.656). Performance remained stable over 1.5 years, and the final assessment revealed a strong impact of ever-exposure to the game on management scores (72.6 ± 1.2% vs. 63.5 ± 2.1%, p < 0.001; effect size 0.811). Pre-exposed students were more than twice as likely to correctly diagnose NSTEMI and PE and showed significantly greater adherence to guideline recommendations (e.g., troponin measurement and D-dimer testing in suspected PE).\r\n \r\n \r\n Conclusions\r\n The considerable difference observed between previously exposed and unexposed students suggests a long-term effect of using the game although retention of specific virtual patient cases rather than general principles might partially account for this effect. Thus, the game may foster the implementation of guideline recommendations."],["dc.description.sponsorship","Open-Access-Publikationsfonds 2021"],["dc.identifier.citation","BMC Medical Education. 2021 Mar 30;21(1):189"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/s12909-021-02591-1"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/17750"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/85191"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/112952"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","DOI-Import GROB-425"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","BioMed Central"],["dc.relation.eissn","1472-6920"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.holder","The Author(s)"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.subject","Guideline"],["dc.subject","Emergency"],["dc.subject","Management"],["dc.subject","Digital"],["dc.subject","Simulation"],["dc.subject","Serious game"],["dc.title","Effectiveness of a serious game addressing guideline adherence: cohort study with 1.5-year follow-up"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","149"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medical Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","14"],["dc.contributor.author","Schiekirka, Sarah"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:37:35Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:37:35Z"],["dc.date.issued","2014"],["dc.description.abstract","Background: Estimating learning outcome from comparative student self-ratings is a reliable and valid method to identify specific strengths and shortcomings in undergraduate medical curricula. However, requiring students to complete two evaluation forms (i.e. one before and one after teaching) might adversely affect response rates. Alternatively, students could be asked to rate their initial performance level retrospectively. This approach might threaten the validity of results due to response shift or effort justification bias. Methods: Two consecutive cohorts of medical students enrolled in a six-week cardio-respiratory module were enrolled in this study. In both cohorts, performance gain was estimated for 33 specific learning objectives. In the first cohort, outcomes calculated from ratings provided before (pretest) and after (posttest) teaching were compared to outcomes derived from comparative self-ratings collected after teaching only (thentest and posttest). In the second cohort, only thentests and posttests were used to calculate outcomes, but data collection tools differed with regard to item presentation. In one group, thentest and posttest ratings were obtained sequentially on separate forms while in the other, both ratings were obtained simultaneously for each learning objective. Results: Using thentest ratings to calculate performance gain produced slightly higher values than using true pretest ratings. Direct comparison of then-and posttest ratings also yielded slightly higher performance gain than sequential ratings, but this effect was negligibly small. Conclusions: Given the small effect sizes, using thentests appears to be equivalent to using true pretest ratings. Item presentation in the posttest does not significantly impact on results."],["dc.description.sponsorship","Faculty of Medicine, Georg-August-University Gottingen"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/1472-6920-14-149"],["dc.identifier.isi","000339517100001"],["dc.identifier.pmid","25043503"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/10501"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/32873"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Biomed Central Ltd"],["dc.relation.issn","1472-6920"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","Assessment of two different types of bias affecting the results of outcome-based evaluation in undergraduate medical education"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","e0203851"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","9"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","PLOS ONE"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","13"],["dc.contributor.author","Middeke, Angélina"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Schuelper, Madita"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Schuelper, Nikolai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:46:07Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:46:07Z"],["dc.date.issued","2018"],["dc.description.abstract","INTRODUCTION: Serious Games are increasingly being used in undergraduate medical education. They are usually intended to enhance learning with a focus on knowledge acquisition and skills development. According to the current literature, few studies have assessed their effectiveness regarding clinical reasoning (CR). The aim of this prospective study was to compare a Serious Game, the virtual Accident & Emergency department 'EMERGE' to small-group problem-based learning (PBL) regarding student learning outcome on clinical reasoning in the short term. METHODS: A total of 112 final-year medical students self-selected to participate in ten 90-minute sessions of either small-group PBL or playing EMERGE. CR was assessed in a formative examination consisting of six key feature cases and a final 45-minute EMERGE session. RESULTS: Overall, the EMERGE group (n = 78) scored significantly higher than the PBL group (n = 34) in the key feature examination (62.5 (IQR: 17.7)% vs. 54.2 (IQR: 21.9)%; p = 0.015). There was no significant difference in performance levels between groups regarding those cases which had been discussed in both instructional formats during the training phase. In the final EMERGE session, the EMERGE group achieved significantly better results than the PBL group in all four cases regarding the total score as well as in three of four cases regarding the final diagnosis and the correct therapeutic interventions. CONCLUSION: EMERGE can be used effectively for CR training in undergraduate medical education. The difference in key feature exam scores was driven by additional exposure to more cases in EMERGE compared to PBL despite identical learning time in both instructional formats. EMERGE is a potential alternative to intensive small-group teaching. Further work is needed to establish how Serious Games enhance CR most effectively."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1371/journal.pone.0203851"],["dc.identifier.pmid","30204773"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15397"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15700"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59380"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.subject.ddc","610"],["dc.title","Training of clinical reasoning with a Serious Game versus small-group problem-based learning: A prospective study"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","107"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medicine"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","16"],["dc.contributor.author","Ludwig, Sascha"],["dc.contributor.author","Schuelper, Nikolai"],["dc.contributor.author","Brown, Jamie"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:45:33Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:45:33Z"],["dc.date.issued","2018"],["dc.description.abstract","Background The Choosing Wisely campaign highlights the importance of clinical reasoning abilities for competent and reflective physicians. The principles of this campaign should be addressed in undergraduate medical education. Recent research suggests that answering questions on important steps in patient management promotes knowledge retention. It is less clear whether increasing the authenticity of educational material by the inclusion of videos further enhances learning outcome. Methods In a prospective randomised controlled cross-over study, we assessed whether repeated video-based testing is more effective than repeated text-based testing in training students to choose appropriate diagnostic tests, arrive at correct diagnoses and identify advisable therapies. Following an entry exam, fourth-year undergraduate medical students attended 10 weekly computer-based seminars during which they studied patient case histories. Each case contained five key feature questions (items) on the diagnosis and treatment of the presented patient. Students were randomly allocated to read text cases (control condition) or watch videos (intervention), and assignment to either text or video was switched between groups every week. Using a within-subjects design, student performance on video-based and text-based items was assessed 13 weeks (exit exam) and 9 months (retention test) after the first day of term. The primary outcome was the within-subject difference in performance on video-based and text-based items in the exit exam. Results Of 125 eligible students, 93 provided data for all three exams (response rate 74.4%). Percent scores were significantly higher for video-based than for text-based items in the exit exam (76.2 ± 19.4% vs. 72.4 ± 19.1%, p = 0.026) but not the retention test (69.2 ± 20.2% vs. 66.4 ± 20.3%, p = 0.108). An additional Bayesian analysis of this retention test suggested that video-based training is marginally more effective than text-based training in the long term (Bayes factor 2.36). Regardless of presentation format, student responses revealed a high prevalence of erroneous beliefs that, if applied to the clinical context, could place patients at risk. Conclusion Repeated video-based key feature testing produces superior short-term learning outcome compared to text-based testing. Given the high prevalence of misconceptions, efforts to improve clinical reasoning training in medical education are warranted. The Choosing Wisely campaign lends itself to being part of this process."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/s12916-018-1090-y"],["dc.identifier.pmid","29976211"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15244"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/59256"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","How can we teach medical students to choose wisely? A randomised controlled cross-over study of video- versus text-based case scenarios"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","349"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Advances in Health Sciences Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","356"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","15"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Muenscher, C."],["dc.contributor.author","Pukrop, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Harendza, Sigrid"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T08:40:29Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T08:40:29Z"],["dc.date.issued","2010"],["dc.description.abstract","In recent years, increasing attention has been paid to web-based learning although the advantages of computer-aided instruction over traditional teaching formats still need to be confirmed. This study examined whether participation in an online module on the differential diagnosis of dyspnoea impacts on student performance in a multiple choice examination of factual knowledge in cardiology and pneumology. A virtual problem-based learning environment for medical students supervised by postgraduate teachers was created. Seventy-four out of 183 fourth-year medical students volunteered to use the online module while attending a 6-week cardio-respiratory curriculum in summer 2007. Of these, 40 were randomly selected to be included ( intervention group); the remaining 34 served as an internal control group. Analysis of all written exams taken during the preceding term showed that both groups were comparable (86.4 +/- 1.1 vs. 85.9 +/- 1.1%; p = 0.751). Students in the intervention group scored significantly higher in the final course assessment than students allocated to the control group (84.8 +/- 1.3 vs. 79.5 +/- 1.4%; p = 0.006; effect size 0.67). Thus, additional problem-based learning with an online module as part of an undergraduate cardio-respiratory curriculum lead to higher students' scores in an exam testing factual knowledge. Whether using this teaching format increases overall student motivation to engage in the learning process needs to be further investigated."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s10459-009-9201-3"],["dc.identifier.isi","000281894600005"],["dc.identifier.pmid","19774475"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/7622"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/19243"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Springer"],["dc.relation.issn","1382-4996"],["dc.title","Significant increase in factual knowledge with web-assisted problem-based learning as part of an undergraduate cardio-respiratory curriculum"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.artnumber","137"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","BMC Medical Education"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","17"],["dc.contributor.author","Müller, Tjark"],["dc.contributor.author","Montano, Diego"],["dc.contributor.author","Poinstingl, Herbert"],["dc.contributor.author","Dreiling, Katharina"],["dc.contributor.author","Schiekirka-Schwake, Sarah"],["dc.contributor.author","Anders, Sven"],["dc.contributor.author","Raupach, Tobias"],["dc.contributor.author","Steinbuechel, Nicole von"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:43:52Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:43:52Z"],["dc.date.issued","2017"],["dc.description.abstract","BACKGROUND: The seven categories of the Stanford Faculty Development Program (SFDP) represent a framework for planning and assessing medical teaching. Nevertheless, so far there is no specific evaluation tool for large-group lectures that is based on these categories. This paper reports the development and psychometric validation of a short German evaluation tool for large-group lectures in medical education (SETMED-L: 'Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures') based on the SFDP-categories. METHODS: Data were collected at two German medical schools. In Study 1, a full information factor analysis of the new 14-item questionnaire was performed. In Study 2, following cognitive debriefings and adjustments, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed. The model was tested for invariance across medical schools and student gender. Convergent validity was assessed by comparison with results of the FEVOR questionnaire. RESULTS: Study 1 (n = 922) yielded a three-factor solution with one major (10 items) and two minor factors (2 items each). In Study 2 (n = 2740), this factor structure was confirmed. Scale reliability ranged between α = 0.71 and α = 0.88. Measurement invariance was given across student gender but not across medical schools. Convergent validity in the subsample tested (n = 246) yielded acceptable results. CONCLUSION: The SETMED-L showed satisfactory to very good psychometric characteristics. The main advantages are its short yet comprehensive form, the integration of SFDP-categories and its focus on medical education."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1186/s12909-017-0970-8"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/15135"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/58988"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.intern","In goescholar not merged with http://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/14707 but duplicate"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Institut für Erziehungswissenschaft"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Arbeitsbereich Empirische Bildungsforschung mit dem Schwerpunkt Schul- und Unterrichtsforschung"],["dc.rights","CC BY 4.0"],["dc.rights.uri","https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0"],["dc.title","Evaluation of large-group lectures in medicine – development of the SETMED-L (Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures) questionnaire"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.subtype","original_ja"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]