Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 287080

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : September | Volume : 16 | Issue : 9 | Page : DC24 - DC27 Full Version

Perception and Experience of Medical Students Regarding Hybrid Problem-based Learning Technique at a Medical College in West Bengal, India: A Cross-sectional Study


Published: September 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/57794.16902
Susmita Bhattacharya, Nandita Pal, Koushik Ghosh, Parthasarathi Chakrabarty, Sipra Saha, Debalina Das

1. Professor, Department of Microbiology, College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 3. Assistant Professor, Department of Physiology, Raiganj Government Medical College and Hospital, Raiganj, West Bengal, India. 4. Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 5. Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 6. Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Debalina Das,
8 B.L. Ganguly Lane, Kolkata-700033, West Bengal, India.
E-mail: drdebalinadas63885@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Hybrid Problem-Based Learning (h-PBL) is a type of teaching-learning technique that incorporates both in-person learning and virtual learning via hybrid classroom tools. It reportedly increases student engagement, positively impact their learning process and improve communication skills. During Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) times, its applicability was further enhanced as it allowed the flexibility of teaching as well as learning from home to both teachers and students.

Aim: To assess the perception and experience of 2nd phase MBBS students after undergoing training by the h-PBL method.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 2nd phase MBBS students in the Department of Microbiology at College of Medicine and Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata from 15th March to 14th April 2022. A total of 111 students of 2nd phase MBBS of the college gave an informed consent to be part of the study. All inductees underwent a structured training by h-PBL technique following which their perception and experience about the exercise was sought via questionnaire. Data were presented in frequency and percentage. Association between mean scores of male and female participants was calculated by Chi-square test.

Results: Out of the 111 participants, 58 (52.2%) were male and 53 (47.8%) were female with mean age of 19.5±0.5 years (range 18-22 years). The h-PBL technique was perceived to be motivating for self-directed learning by 97 (85.6%) of the respondents. A total of 107 (96.4%) students agreed that h-PBL is more effective than traditional teaching for acquiring both theoretical and practical knowledge, learning and understanding topics correctly and also identifying and rectifying their deficiencies in knowledge and skills. More than 90% participants (102 of 111) felt that h-PBL has more potential than traditional teaching to establish fruitful student-teacher interaction and provide better feedback opportunities. Overall student satisfaction in our study showed 96.4% agreement (107 of 111).

Conclusion: The students considered h-PBL model to be better than traditional teaching to help them acquire theoretical knowledge and practical skills. They also felt that it improved their communication skills, teamwork ethics and motivated them to undertake self-directed learning.

Keywords

Coronavirus disease, Online teaching-learning technique, Self-directed learning

Hybrid-Problem Based Learning (h-PBL) is a type of teaching-learning technique that incorporates both in-person learning and virtual learning using hybrid classroom tools (1). In the field of medical education, the h-PBL technique has been reported to increase student engagement, improve attention span, ensure better knowledge retention, promote better communication skills between students and teachers and have an overall positive impact on the learning process amongst the medical students (1),(2),(3).

The primary operational idea behind hybrid learning technique is generally thought to have originated from the pioneering works of Benjamin Horton, whose quote viz. ‘I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand’ aptly conveys the essence of h-PBL (4). The Harvard Medical School is attributed to be one of the pioneering institutes to have adopted the hybrid model of teaching to improve the quality of medical education. They designed and implemented a ‘New Pathway curriculum’ in the later part of the last century in which substantial amount of h-PBL sessions were incorporated and was aimed to stimulate individual initiative as well as balance the latest developments in medical science with the age-old values of teaching (1),(5).

However in spite of its obvious advantages, the hybrid way of learning has its own implementational challenges as it is inherently resource intensive by design and requires the institutions to have adequate teaching infrastructure and trained manpower along with a well-designed curriculum (1). Thus, this technique remained largely neglected as a teaching-learning tool for imparting medical education in developing nations like India till recently (6).

It had long been the ‘felt-need’ of medical educators in India to have a more learner-centric medical education curriculum. It led to the introduction of the new Competency Based Medical Education (CBME) curriculum in 2019 which envisioned to churn out Indian medical graduates who would exhibit adequate and quantifiable competency in the spheres of knowledge, skill and sensitivity (7).

To achieve that goal, many notable changes in the deliverance of medical education was suggested which included introduction of a foundation course, more emphasis small-group discussion sessions problem-based learning, self-directed learning, early clinical exposure, vertical and horizontal integration sessions etc (7). But all such endeavours took a backseat due to the sudden emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. As the pandemic situation continued to linger, avenues were sought by medical educators to continue delivering medical education without violating the COVID-19 norms. That is when the adoption of the hybrid learning methods was mooted, tried, promoted and ultimately established as it offered a flexible and safe option to both teachers and students to remain involved in regular classes even when they stayed at home to abide the pandemic norms or on account of their sickness (6),(8),(9).

In recent times the COVID-19 pandemic is thankfully on the wane and consequently there has been relaxation on almost all stringent pandemic norms. This has allowed medical institutions to return to pre-COVID ways of teaching. However, the definite advantages of the hybrid model of teaching is now much more clearly evident to both teachers and students and various medical institutions worldwide as well as in India have been conducting studies of varied designs to document the perception and experience of the medical students who received their medical education by the hybrid learning model. Most of these studies relied on students’ recall of their hybrid learning experience during the entirety of the COVID period (9),(10),(11),(12),(13). The present study is designed on similar terms but unlike the aforementioned studies, the concerned study required the participants to give a more first hand and current feedback of their perception and experience of h-PBL model of teaching after undergoing a structured h-PBL session.

Hence, present study was conducted to assess the perception and experience of 2nd phase MBBS students after undergoing training by the h-PBL method.

Material and Methods

This cross-sectional study was conducted in the Microbiology Department of College of Medicine Sagore Dutta Hospital, Kolkata, a tertiary care teaching hospital in West Bengal, India from 15th of March 2022 to 14th of April 2022. The study was initiated after receiving approval from Institutional Ethics Committee [IEC Memo No: CMSDH/IEC/279/03-2022]. The study participants were informed about the details of the study objectives at the beginning of the study and written informed consent was taken.

Inclusion criteria: All those 2nd phase MBBS students who were willing to participate in the study and signed an informed consent were included.

Exclusion criteria: Those students who were unwilling to participate from the outset and those students who agreed to participate but did not attend both or either of the online and offline classes which were part of the study, were excluded.

Sample size estimation: The survey was planned to be performed on all 2nd phase MBBS students, i.e. 128. But after applying the exclusion criteria, the remaining 111 students were enrolled as final sample size.

Technique and tools: A faculty core group was formed comprising of four faculties from the Department of Microbiology. The faculties took a total of four problem-based hybrid classes in the 1 month study period. The four topics that were chosen for the h-PBL sessions were infectious causes of fever, anaemia, diarrhoea and jaundice. Each h-PBL session consisted of a 30 minute online lecture followed by 2 hours offline small-group interactive discussion and activity session on same topic. The 111 students were segregated into 4 groups consisting of 28 members each in the first 3 groups and 27 in the last one, for the purpose of the small-group discussions. The activities that were done included role-play sessions, clinical case scenario discussion, simulated clinical report analysis and quizzes. After completion of all 4 sessions, the perception and experience of the students to this approach of teaching was sought by way of a questionnaire, which was circulated among them via email and whatsApp and their responses were obtained.

The questionnaire was created using Google forms by the members of the faculty core group involved in the study. For devising the questionnaire the members mostly depended upon their previous experience from projects conducted in the depatment. It was structured to be self-administrable and contained close-ended questions. The questionnaire was ‘face-validated’ by a panel of relevant experts in the field. The final questionnaire consisted of 10 questions with close-ended single-response type multiple choice answers in a five-point Likert scale with ‘strong disagreement’ being ascribed ‘1’ point and ‘strong agreement’ ‘5’ points. So the maximum possible total score for each question was 555 (111x5) and minimum 111 (111x1). If the sum of all the responses to a particular question was ≤ 333, the interpretation was that the participants’ experience/perception in that aspect was ‘unsatisfactory/negative’ during the h-PBL session and if it was >333 then the same was considered ‘satisfactory/positive’. Out of the 10 questions in the questionnaire, the first and the last question was about the ‘experience’ and the rest were about the ‘perception’ of the participants.

Statistical Analysis

Data from the responses to the questionnaire was entered in Microsoft Excel. Scores for responses to individual questions was summated by the Excel software. Association between mean scores of male and female participants was calculated by Chi-square test using Open Epi platform (version 3.01). A p-value <0.05 was considered to be significant.

Results

The study participants were mostly between 18 to 22 years of age with mean age of 19.5±0.5 years. Out of the 111 participants, 58 (52.2%) were males and 53 (47.8%) females. The responses that the students gave to the 10 questions of the questionnaire are presented in (Table/Fig 1).

The summation of the scores for the responses to the questions pertaining to students’ experience, namely the first and the last question of the questionnaire, were 516 and 510 respectively. Hence experience wise, the h-PBL sessions can be considered to be quite ‘satisfactory’ to the students. Individual summative scores of all the other questions were much greater than 333, which was the cut-off score set to deem responses to a question positive or negative. As all these questions were formulated to obtain the students’ perception to various facets of the h-PBL like motivation for self-directed learning, promoting healthy student-teacher relationship, fostering better knowledge acquisition and retention, identifying weakness and gaps in knowledge etc., it can be safely inferred that perception wise the h-PBL exercise was ‘positively’ accepted by the participating students (Table/Fig 1).

The responses from the 58 males and 53 females students were segregated into two groups and the mean scores for each question calculated. The mean-scores for each question when segregated for gender remain comparable as there are no significant differences (p-value >0.05 for all questions) between the males and females in terms of perception and experience for h-PBL technique (Table/Fig 2).

Discussion

The present study was carried out among the 2nd phase MBBS students, who were first exposed to the hybrid model of teaching and then their perception and experience about this teaching-learning technique was obtained by means of a predesigned questionnaire.

The hybrid-Problem Based Learning (h-PBL) technique was perceived to be quite novel and enriching experience by almost all of the respondents in this study (109 of 111). It was also perceived to be a motivation for self-directed learning by majority (95 0f 111) of the respondents of the study. Kharay SS et al., in their work evaluating h-PBL among 1st year MBBS students also reported that h-PBL was perceived to be a novel and intellectually enriching experience by the students and increased their motivation towards self-directed learning (14).

In the study, 107 out of 111 students ‘agreed’ to the idea that h-PBL is more effective than traditional teaching for acquiring both theoretical and practical knowledge. Lian J et al., in their work had similar findings wherein their respondents, which consisted of 2nd year medical students, reported hybrid-PBL to be an effective learning method and considered it better than traditional teaching methods at improving their basic knowledge and problem-solving skills (15).

Chilkoti G et al., in their study to assess and compare the satisfaction of 1st year medical students trained in Basic Life Support (BLS) both by lecture-based and hybrid-PBL methods found that most students preferred h-PBL method over traditional lecture-based method for learning and understanding topics correctly and also identifying and rectifying their deficiencies in knowledge and skills (16). In this study also almost unanimous agreement (107 of 111) in responses were obtained from the students when queried on similar notions.

Majority of the participants in this study ‘agreed’ to queries that asked them about the potential of h-PBL being better than traditional teaching to establish fruitful student-teacher interaction and to provide better feedback opportunities. This has also been corroborated in the works of Armstrong EG et al., and Chang et al., (1),(17).

Overall student satisfaction in this study showed 96.4% (107 of 111) ‘agreement’. Jiménez-Saiz R and Rosace D in their systematic review also reported that the use of h-PBL was superior compared to traditional teaching and pure-PBL as evidenced by the high level of student’s satisfaction of the different studies reviewed by them (18).

In this study, no significant difference of response between male and female participants was noted both for ‘experience’ and ‘perception’ to h-PBL method of teaching. The authors could not find any relevant literature where similar comparison was done using h-PBL technique but Kassab S et al., had reported gender-related differences in performance of participants (females performing better than males) in student-led PBL methods (19).

Limitation(s)

The main limitation of the present study was that, it included a slice of MBBS students from single professional year and not from all three professional years of MBBS study.

Conclusion

Hybrid-PBL as a teaching-learning tool was a novel experience to most of the study participants and their overall satisfaction to this method of learning was almost unanimous at the end. In terms of perception, responses of the study participants tend to indicate that they felt, they can acquire theoretical knowledge and practical skills better with h-PBL technique than by traditional teaching methods. They also perceived that the h-PBL method fosters healthy student-teacher relationship, improves communication skills, teaches proper teamwork ethics and is a motivating stimulus to undertake self-directed learning. Another important aspect that was noted from this study is that the student feedback generated from it can be utilised to remodulate the hybrid method and further implement it in an improved way in accordance to the learner’s acceptance. But, to extrapolate the findings of this study on a large scale, a bigger multicentre study with a larger sample size that includes participants from all three professional years of MBBS course is deemed necessary by the authors.

References

1.
Armstong EG. A Hybrid Model of Problem-based Learning. In: Boud D, Feletti G. editors. The Challenge of Problem-Based Learning. 2nd Ed. London, Kogan 1997; pp. 137-50.
2.
Strobel J, Van Barneveld A. When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta-analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdiscip J Problem-based Learning. 2009;3(1):04. [crossref]
3.
Barrows HS ,Tamblyn RM. Problem-Based Learning (PBL): An Approach to Medical Education. 1st ed. Vol 1. New York: Springer Publishing; 1980.
4.
Horton B. ‘I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand’ - putting learning models into practice. Planet. 2001;3(1):12-14. [crossref]
5.
Densen P. Challenges and opportunities facing medical education. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2011;122:48-58. PMID: 21686208.
6.
Jayara S. The advantages and disadvantages of online teaching in medical education. J Med Evid. 2020;1:144-56.
7.
Medical Council of India. Competency based Undergraduate curriculum for the Indian Medical Graduate, 2018;1:11-13.
8.
Rose S. Medical student education in the time of COVID-19. J Am Med Assoc. 2020;323(21):2131-32. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
Singh J, Steele K, Singh L. Combining the best of online and face-to-face learning: Hybrid and blended learning approach for COVID-19, Post vaccine, & post-pandemic World. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 2021;50(2)140-71. Doi: 10.1177/00472395211047865. [crossref]
10.
Gupta S, Dabas A, Swarnim S, Mishra D. Medical education during COVID-19 associated lockdown: Faculty and students' perspective. Med J Armed Forces India. 2021;77(Suppl 1):S79-S84. Doi: 10.1016/j.mjafi.2020.12.008. Epub 2021 Feb 2. PMID: 33612936; PMCID: PMC7873682. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Arja SB, Wilson L, Fatteh S, Kottathveetil P, Fateh A, Arja SB, et al. Medical education during COVID-19: Response at one medical school. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2021;9(3):176-182. Doi: 10.30476/jamp.2020.88744.1351.
12.
Sur Mukherjee S, Das Sarkar K, Sengupta D, Sinhababu S. Response of 1st year medical students of West Bengal about compulsive online teaching during COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study. JCDR. 2021;15(7):CC06-12. [crossref]
13.
Chakraborty M, Reddy YA, Ghoshal JA, Amudharaj D, Tripathi M. Preparedness of medical students towards e-learning conducted during COVID-19 lockdown: A cross-sectional descriptive study. J Edu Health Promot. 2021;10:302. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Kharay SS, Sharma A, Bansal P. Evaluation of hybrid problem-based learning in large classrooms: A qualitative and quantitative analysis Int J Res Med Sci. 2018;6(11):3623-28. [crossref]
15.
Lian J, He F. Improved performance of students instructed in a hybrid PBL format. Biochem Mol Biol Edu. 2013;41(1):05-10. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Chilkoti G, Mohta M, Wadhwa R, Saxena AK, Sharma CS, Shankar N. Students' satisfaction to hybrid problem-based learning format for basic life support/advanced cardiac life support teaching. Indian J Anaesthesia. 2016;60(11):821-26. [crossref] [PubMed]
17.
Chang BJ. Problem-based learning in medical school: A student's perspective. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2006;12(1):88-89. Doi:10.1016/j.amsu.2016.11.011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amsu.2016.11.011. [crossref] [PubMed]
18.
Jiménez-Saiz R, Rosace D. Is hybrid-PBL advancing teaching in biomedicine? A systematic review. BMC Medical Education. 2019;19:226. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1673-0. [crossref] [PubMed]
19.
Kassab S, Abu-Hijleh M, Al-Shboul Q, Hamdy H. Gender-related differences in learning in student-led PBL tutorials. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2005;18(2):272-82. Doi: 10.1080/13576280500148577. PMID: 16009620. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/57794.16902

Date of Submission: May 17, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Jun 21, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Aug 08, 2022
Date of Publishing: Sep 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. No

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: May 19, 2022
• Manual Googling: Jul 21, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Aug 29, 2022 (6%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com