The outcomes of team‐based learning versus small group interactive learning in the obstetrics and gynecology course for undergraduate students

Abstract Introduction Team‐based learning (TBL) is a well‐established active teaching method which has been shown to have pedagogical advantages in some areas such as business education and preclinical disciplines in undergraduate medical education. Increasingly, it has been adapted to clinical disciplines. However, its superiority over conventional learning methods used in clinical years of medical school remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare TBL with traditional seminars delivered in small group interactive learning (SIL) format in terms of knowledge acquisition and retention, satisfaction and engagement of undergraduate medical students during the 6‐week obstetrics and gynecology clerkship. Material and methods The study was conducted at Karolinska Institutet, a medical university in Sweden, and had a prospective, crossover design. All fifth‐year medical students attending the obstetrics and gynecology clerkship, at four different teaching hospitals in Stockholm (approximately 40 students per site), in the Autumn semester of 2022 were invited to participate. Two seminars (one in obstetrics and one in gynecology) were designed and delivered in two different formats, ie TBL and SIL. The student:teacher ratio was approximately 10:1 in the traditional SIL seminars and 20:1 in the TBL. All TBL seminars were facilitated by a single teacher who had been trained and certified in TBL. Student knowledge acquisition and retention were assessed by final examination scores, and the engagement and satisfaction were assessed by questionnaires. For the TBL seminars, individual and team readiness assurance tests were also performed and evaluated. Results Of 148 students participating in the classrooms, 132 answered the questionnaires. No statistically significant differences were observed between TBL and SIL methods with regard to student knowledge acquisition and retention, engagement and satisfaction. Conclusions We found no differences in student learning outcomes or satisfaction using TBL or SIL methods. However, as TBL had a double the student to teacher ratio as compared with SIL, in settings where teachers are scarce and suitable rooms are available for TBL sessions, the method may be beneficial in reducing faculty workload without compromising students' learning outcomes.