Journal of Biological Education

ISSN: 0021-9266 (Print) 2157-6009 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjbe20

The effectiveness of the hybrid problem-based

learning approach in the teaching of biology: a
comparison with lecture-based learning

M. Carrió , P. Larramona , J.E. Baños & J. Pérez

To cite this article: M. Carrió , P. Larramona , J.E. Baños & J. Pérez (2011) The
effectiveness of the hybrid problem-based learning approach in the teaching of biology: a
comparison with lecture-based learning, Journal of Biological Education, 45:4, 229-235, DOI:
10.1080/00219266.2010.546011

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.546011

Published online: 15 Jul 2011.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 2668

View related articles

Citing articles: 9 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjbe20
JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL EDUCATION, VOLUME 45, NUMBER 4, DECEMBER 2011 229

Research paper
The effectiveness of the hybrid
problem-based learning approach in
the teaching of biology: a comparison
with lecture-based learning
M. Carrió, P. Larramona, J.E. Baños and J. Pérez
Research Group on Innovative Education in Health Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences,
Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain

Although several studies have shown that the problem-based learning (PBL) method promotes relevant profes-
sional skills as well as critical thinking and lifelong learning, some teachers remain sceptical regarding whether
PBL is also adequate in acquiring the factual knowledge that students need. In this article, we describe an
experience in which PBL has been introduced as an interdisciplinary activity in the teaching of students in the
bachelor degree of biology, with special attention on the analysis of contextualised complex problems. This
experience was a part of a traditional curriculum and roughly 20% of the entire learning time was devoted to
it. We named this teaching approach hybrid problem-based learning (H-PBL) curriculum, in contrast to the
lecture-based learning (LBL) traditional curriculum. The study reported here aims to answer a fundamental
question: are there differences between both models in the students’ factual knowledge acquisition? The results
of this study have failed to show significant differences in factual knowledge acquisition between both groups
of students. We conclude that the use of an interdisciplinary H-PBL approach has no deleterious effect on the
recall of factual knowledge, while it may permit the simultaneous development of other professional skills,
which could be more difficult to attain in traditional curricula based mainly on the lecture-based method.

Keywords: problem-based learning; undergraduate biology; interdisciplinary; contextualised problems

Introduction
The use of problem-based learning (PBL) in college
education has spread extensively during recent dec-
ades. It has been suggested that PBL is better than
the traditional approaches (lecture-based learning,
LBL) for acquiring the generic skills needed for sci-
entific careers, such as cooperative working, integra-
tion of information, critical thinking, communication
skills and self-directed learning (Dolmans et al.
2005). In the PBL approach, complex and realistic
problems are used to trigger students’ analytic think-
ing and to generate the adequate questions to solve
them. To this end, they need to identify the knowl-
edge, concepts and principles they need to learn in
order to answer the proposed questions and to apply
their new learning to similar problems in the future
(Hmelo-Silver 2004; Cantillon et al. 2003). In PBL,
students work in small groups, bringing together
their skills in a process that resembles scientific
inquiry. The main elements of this method are the
problem, the group and the tutor. The problem leads
to forcing the student to identify the learning objec-
tives and to elaborate a hypothesis. Research, group
discussion and the acquisition of new knowledge lead
them to answer the questions that will solve the
problem. In the learning process of PBL, the tutors’
role is critical: they will stimulate the participation of
every student, promote critical thinking, facilitate
students’ learning and autonomy and prevent the

Corresponding author: Mar Carrió, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Dr. Aiguader, 80,
08003 Barcelona, Spain. Email: mar.carrio@upf.edu.
Journal of Biological Education ISSN 0021–9266 print/ISSN 2157–6009 online Ó 2011 Society of Biology
http://www.tandfonline.com
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2010.546011
230 M. CARRIÓ ET AL. _______________________________________________________________________________________________
discussion from moving away from the main objec-
tives of the problem (Barrows 1988; De Grave et al.
1999).
There is some evidence of the effectiveness of
PBL in developing critical thinking (Tiwari et al.
2006), acquiring professional skills (Berkson 1993)
and generating students’ interest and motivation
(Michel et al. 2002; Vernon and Blake 1993). Studies
carried out at Harvard University have shown that
PBL students believed that this method helped them
to develop humanistic and social skills and that the
programme influenced their thinking about profes-
sional issues (Peters et al. 2000). Nevertheless, there
is some scepticism about the effectiveness of PBL for
learning basic science subjects. Some comparisons
between the PBL and LBL approaches have been
performed in medical students, which generally show
that factual knowledge is similar in both groups
(Albano et al. 1996; Blake et al. 2000; Farquhar et al.
1986; Kaufman and Mann 1998). However, such
comparative studies are lacking for students of bio-
logical sciences, where basic subjects might be con-
sidered even more important than in the training of
medical students.
In 2004, our school began a pilot study devoted
to exploring how to adapt the bachelor of biology to
the European Higher Education Area (EHEA), fol-
lowing the Bologna Declaration. One of the corner-
stones of the study has been the introduction of PBL
activities in the traditional curriculum to explore the
feasibility of creating a hybrid model of teaching.
With this aim, 20% of the teaching time was devoted
to PBL activities, whereas the remaining time was
used in traditional teaching activities such as lectures,
lab courses and seminars. This process was started
with first-year students and has since spread to the
entire curriculum. Problems that were later used in
PBL tutorials were built using the educational objec-
tives of the subjects of each term. With this experi-
ence, faculty members from different disciplines were
involved in writing interdisciplinary cases and partici-
pating as tutors in the group sessions as well.
To permit the inclusion of PBL activities in the
students’ activities, the time devoted to lectures was
cut by 20% and transferred to PBL tutorials. This
option was questioned by some faculty members, as
they worried about the possibility that this reduction
in lecturing would reduce the acquisition of the fac-
tual knowledge that students would need in the fol-
lowing years.
The present study was designed to test the
hypothesis that effectiveness of hybrid PBL model
(H-PBL) and traditional curriculum, mainly based on
lectures (lecture-based learning, LBL), to learn factual
knowledge was similar. To prove it, two groups of
second-year students taken from consecutive years,
the first educated only in LBL and the second in H-
PBL, were compared to assess their recall of factual
knowledge at the end of the first year. Herein we
report the main findings of this study.
Methods, participants and data
sources
Setting
The study was carried out with the students of the
bachelor degree in biology, in the Faculty of Health
and Life Sciences of Universitat Pompeu Fabra, in
Barcelona (Spain), in the academic years 2004–05 and
2005–06. The PBL method was introduced in the first
year of studies in 2004–05. Therefore, both H-PBL
and LBL learning methods actually co-existed in the
faculty, being used by different cohorts.
Participants
Data were collected from two consecutive cohorts of
second-year students, the first educated only in LBL
and the second in H-PBL. Sixty students were ini-
tially available for each cohort.
PBL activities
Nine problems, which integrate the different subjects
of the first year, were prepared by the different
teachers and reviewed by the PBL activity’s coordi-
nators (Mar Carrió and Josep Eladi Baños) in order
to guarantee the problems’ quality and their ability
to reach the educational objectives of the pilot study
described previously. Accordingly, they included spe-
cific learning objectives from the different subjects of
the first year of the degree (Table 1).
Students worked in groups of 8–10 during the full
academic year (nine months). They spent three
weeks on solving each problem, accounting for nine
different problems for each year. They had two
working sessions per week, one with the tutor and
one with the group alone. The activity started with a
session in which, first of all, each tutor introduced
the problem and then students stated the main ques-
tions from the text, identified their knowledge defi-
ciencies, had brainstorming sessions, proposed
hypotheses, listed the learning objectives which
would constitute their study plan and distributed the
tasks among the members of the group. After this
session, students individually researched one or more
topics in order to share the findings with their peers
in the next meetings. In the second session, students
met without the tutor and presented their research;
they had to integrate the new, acquired information
and use it to continue the analysis of the problem. In
the third session, they met again with the tutor to
discuss their research and the new knowledge they
had acquired. The role of the tutor was focused on
stimulating the students to argue their previously
____________________________________________________________________________ RESEARCH PAPER 231

Table 1. PBL curricula organisation in the first year of the bachelor in biology at
Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Specific educative
Problem Subjects objectives Problem context

1 Physics, biology To define atomic structure
and To differentiate stable an
chemistry unstable isotopes
To analyse radioactivity
applied to biomedicine
A biology student is bombarded with questions by family
and friends about radioactive
diagnostic tests and treatments.

2 Zoology and To apply acid–base reactions An ecological disaster. A toxic product is dumped in a
chemistry To interpret pH and pKa river and a lot of fish are dead.
To compare different The example is used to introduce the respiratory process
respiratory processes from different animals.

3 Physics and To identify animal cooperation A student group talk about a science fiction film about
zoology To relate physiology to giant ants that colonise the earth.
surface/volume animals
To contextualise Bergman and
Allen laws
To analyse magnetism and
biomagnetism

4 Anthropology
and botany
To analyse non-lineal A discussion about various allergies, such as pollen, gluten
evolution and milk leads to many
To relate genes to culture questions about culture habits and evolution.
coevolution
To analyse angiosperm
evolution
To identify Paleoclimates
through pollen analysis

5 Biochemistry To apply basic statistic A PhD student has to compare intolerance to lactose
and concepts (average, standard results with those of a colleague.
mathematics deviation)
To represent 2D graphics
To determinate enzymatic
activity and relate
primary structure to cellular
localisation and to enzymatic
activity

6 Biochemistry
and botany
To identify mechanisms A theatre scene about a family discussing the benefits of
involved in texture eating tomatoes.
and fruit composition
To describe maturation fruit
regulation
To analyse transgenic plant
engineering

7 Anatomy, To describe the A man who started going to the gymnasium 6 months
physiology and musculoskeletal system ago has gained muscular mass. The effects of sport and
cytology To relate sport to skeletal supplements are discussed.
muscle

8 Anatomy, To analyse endocytosis A newspaper death notice. It gives little information about
physiology and alterations that can cause heart death by heart attack; students have to discover the causes.
cytology attacks

9 Anatomy, To describe smooth muscle A girl gives birth early.

physiology and To analyse uterine contraction
cytology To differentiate heart from
uterine muscle
232 M. CARRIÓ ET AL. _______________________________________________________________________________________________
formulated hypothesis based on prior knowledge and
evidence found. A second part of the problem was
presented at the end of the tutorial and the process
was repeated following the same premises.
At the end of each problem, students had to pre-
pare a final report explaining the process they fol-
lowed to solve the problem, including group
organisation, identification of the relevant knowl-
edge, working hypotheses, identified research topics,
conclusions and critical use of the information
sources. Student evaluation was based on their partic-
ipation in tutorials and on the final report.
Design of the study
The comparison of two groups was performed by
means of an evaluation with an instrument specifi-
cally prepared for this purpose (see next section).
Students were evaluated nine months after they had
completed their first year (ie in their second year of
their degree) on a day that was not previously
known to them. It was carried out during their lec-
turing time, and it was voluntary and anonymous.
Almost all students participated. The LBL cohort car-
ried out the exercises in 2004, and the PBL cohort
in 2005. The answers from the LBL cohort were
stored and analysed when results from both were
available. The reviewers were blind as to which
cohort the exams corresponded to.
The evaluation instrument
The instrument to test factual knowledge of basic
science acquired by the first year had two parts, A
and B. Part A comprised 22 multiple-choice ques-
tions (MCQ) and Part B had nine short-answer
questions (SAQ). MCQ were chosen among those
questions with the lowest difficulty index of each
subject obtained from previous years, but that had
not been used to evaluate the participants of the cur-
rent study. The chosen questions (four for each sub-
ject) were sent to the 11 first-year teachers, who
were asked to choose the two most relevant and to
write new questions to be used as contextualised
SAQ. All teachers made the choice of the MCQ and
nine of them wrote the SAQ. Thus, the instrument
consisted of 22 MCQ and nine SAQ. Assessment of
the results of Parts A and B were scored separately
using the numeric range 1–10 (equivalent to F to A),
as this is the habitual way of grading in Spain.
Statistical analysis
Statistical comparisons were carried out using several
tests. A t-test was used to compare the mean scores
of both groups. Data were also compared considering
the number of students that failed to pass the exam
(pass threshold: 5/10) using the v2 test.
A qualitative analysis by means of the v2 test was
performed to assess which kind of knowledge was
better acquired by each cohort, to detect significant
differences between both cohorts and to identify the
questions that were better answered by each group.
In addition, the degree of difficulty of each question
was measured and compared for both cohorts.
In all cases, values were considered statistically sig-
nificant if p<0.05.
Questionnaire for analysing students’
competences acquisition in PBL activity
At the end of the 2005–06 academic course, a ques-
tionnaire aimed to monitor the self-perception of
students’ acquired competences was given to students
and teachers. Filling in the questionnaire was volun-
tary and results were collected anonymously. Stu-
dents answered the questionnaire during their
lecturing time, while, as for teachers, the question-
naire was sent and collected by email.
The questionnaire asked the participants to assess
several of the developed competences in the PBL
activity: hypothesis formulation, argumentation, syn-
thesising, data analysis, communication skills, cooper-
ative working and information and time management.
Acquisition of each competence was rated between 0
(no acquisition) and 10 (fully acquired).
Results
Comparison of factual knowledge
acquisition between LBL and H-PBL
students
The LBL cohort comprised 52 students, whereas the
H-PBL group included 42 students. The mean scores
for the MCQ exam were 5.5 (SD=1.5) and 5.2
(SD=1.4) for LBL and H-PBL students, respectively.
SAQ scores were lower for both cohorts, being 3.8
(SD=1.4) and 3.8 (SD=1.6). These values did not
show statistically significant difference (Table 2).
A more detailed analysis comparing students of
each cohort that reached the threshold score in
MCQ and SAQ tests did not show statistical differ-
ences either (Table 3). Additionally, the qualitative
analysis of the results does not show significant dif-
ferences between both cohorts. While LBL students
answered five MCQ and one SAQ items better than
H-PBL students, the H-PBL answered better in
three MCQ and two SAQ items. The individual
questions’ difficulty index does not show any statisti-
cally significant differences between cohorts (data not
shown).
____________________________________________________________________________ RESEARCH PAPER
Development of students’ competences
in PBL activities
The voluntary questionnaire assessing the self-percep-
tion of acquired competences was answered by 72%
and 87% of students and teachers, respectively.
As shown in Figure 1, the level of competence
acquisition was between 5.9 and 7.9. No significant
differences were obtained between students’ and
teachers’ perception on competences acquisition.
However, while students rated cooperative work and
information management as the best reinforced com-
petences, teachers highlighted information manage-
ment and writing communication skills. Most
competences were evaluated higher by students com-
pared to teachers.
Discussion
The introduction of new teaching methods in curric-
ula dominated by traditional educational approaches
is always a conflicting issue among faculty members.
Many reasons are invoked to defeat such changes, a
drop in knowledge acquisition being the most criti-
cal. If it can be demonstrated that such concerns are
unfounded then the door to further innovation will
be opened. With this aim, the present study was
planned as a controlled experiment to determine
whether there is a difference in student learning,
measured by fact retention, after using the H-PBL or
LBL approaches. This study has shown that there
were no significant differences between both educa-
tional strategies in global, MCQ or SAQ scores.
Even when a difference in other learning aspects
cannot be excluded, these results give an important
clue to the probability that PBL does not negatively
affect the acquisition and retention of factual knowl-
edge, at least when used as a hybrid method.
This study does raise several questions. The first is
related to the possibility that the results of our study
Table 2. Comparison of the global scores by type of exam
LBL cohort
MCQ Passed 35
Failed 17
SAQ Passed 12
Failed 40
LBL cohort
MCQ Passed 35
Failed 17
SAQ Passed 12
Failed 40
Notes. Results are expressed by mean (scale 1–10) and standard deviation (SD) parameters for the LBL (n=52) and H-PBL cohorts (n=42).
MCQ, multiple choice questions; SAQ, short answered questions.
233
were actually comparable with those obtained with
curricula using PBL as the main method of teaching.
Our results, stating the absence of differences in fac-
tual knowledge achievement between the LBL and
H-PBL methods, agree with previous studies carried
out in medical students (Albano et al. 1996; Blake
et al. 2000; Farquhar et al. 1986; Kaufman and Mann
1988; Koh et al. 2008; Prince et al. 2003). According
to them, content acquisition in a PBL-based curricu-
lum is as good as in a lecture-based one. However,
student satisfaction with the experience was greater
with PBL, as well as with critical thinking, coopera-
tive work, information management and communi-
cation skills were enhanced. Koh et al. (2008) have
reported evidence which showed that PBL-educated
medical students had a greater appreciation for the
cultural aspects of care as well as legal and ethical
issues and proved greater responsibility in the care of
patients. Moreover, it has been shown that they were
better able to cope with uncertainty and self-directed
continuing learning (Koh et al. 2008; Norman and
Schmidt 2000).
A second aspect is the meaning of the lack of differ-
ences between the cohorts of the study. In other
words, is this a good or a bad result for the H-PBL?
This deserves at least a short comment. It may be said
that if no differences are seen, then H-PBL is useless,
as traditional methods give the same outcome in con-
tent knowledge. Conversely, the similar results in this
item and the additional value of improving other edu-
cational outcomes (such as generic skills) will justify
the additional effort. We believe that the lack of statis-
tically significant differences between the two
approaches is a positive outcome, allowing the rejec-
tion of the idea that there is a reduced factual knowl-
edge associated with H-PBL courses. On the other
hand, comparing students’ scores in standardised tests
only measures one of the goals of H-PBL and neglects
the others. Nevertheless, the results concerning stu-
dents’ competences acquisition (Figure 1) show that
H-PBL cohort v2 p
24 1.3 0.31 NS
18
10 0.01 0.93 NS
32
H-PBL cohort v2 p
24 1.3 0.31 NS
18
10 0.01 0.93 NS
32
234 M. CARRIÓ ET AL. _______________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 3. Comparison using v2 test of the exam scores by pass (>5/10) or fail (<5/10) scores
for the LBL (n=52) and H-PBL cohorts (n=42) in each type of exam

LBL cohort H-PBL cohort

Mean SD Mean SD Student’s t

MCQ 5.5 1.5 5.2 1.4 1.2 NS

SAQ 3.8 1.4 3.8 1.6 0.2 NS
Note. Values were considered statistically significant if p<0.05.

PBL facilitates their achievement, since both students
and teachers rate the development of most of the
competences above 6. The competences that students
perceive to be achieved better are the ability to work
in cooperative groups and the facility to manage infor-
mation, ie knowing where to search, how to select
and how to evaluate information. Moreover, teachers
also stand out the development of the written com-
munication skills. These competences are hardly
developed in traditional teaching approaches, although
they might be very useful for students’ future profes-
sional lives and the European Higher Education Area
(EHEA) guidelines emphasise the necessity to be
included in university formation.
The fact that the marks given by the students are
slightly better than those given by the teachers might
be explained by the lack of students’ previous learn-
ing experiences of this kind.
The data about competences’ acquisition through
PBL activities are also consistent with those previ-
ously published for experiences in medical studies
(Koh et al. 2008).
However, further studies regarding the acquisition of
generic and scientific competences in H-PBL would be
very interesting. We are currently carrying out a new
study to test the differences in solving problems and sci-
entific competences between both cohorts.
Educational implications
This study provides experimental evidence that sup-
ports the assumption that the H-PBL approach does
not affect the students’ factual knowledge acquisition,
when compared with more traditional lecture-based
learning. This is especially important if we consider
the usefulness of PBL in developing generic and sci-
entific skills. With PBL tutorials, students are con-
fronted with complex problems, which do not
usually have only one definite solution. They may
have to look for solutions creatively, make decisions,
work in a cooperative group and deal with uncer-
tainty. These skills are often ignored in higher-edu-
cation curricula, but they are very important for
students who will base their profession on scientific
activity and they will need to make decisions under
uncertain situations. Also, the curricula organisation
using PBL permits the integration of different disci-
plines and the incorporation of social issues in the
professional practice, which may enforce professional
and citizen responsibility.

10

1
Hypothesis Argumentation Synthesising Data analysis Oral Written Cooperative Information Time
formulation communication communication work management management

Figure 1. Students’ (black bars) and teachers’ (grey bars) perception of several
competences acquired through PBL activities
Notes: The questionnaire was answered in 2006 by students and teachers who had participated in PBL activities
for two academic years. Acquisition of each competence was rated between 0 (no acquisition) to 10 (fully
acquired). Graph values indicate the mean and the standard deviation obtained by the answered questionnaires
(43 from the students and 34 from the teachers).
____________________________________________________________________________ RESEARCH PAPER
In conclusion, we believe that the H-PBL method
may contribute in developing an extended range of
scientific and generic skills and may provide a more
challenging, motivating and enjoyable approach to
education. Furthermore, the results reported here may
soothe the worries of the teaching staff concerning the
possibility that the theoretical basis of their subjects
may be not dealt with adequately using PBL
approaches. H-PBL may also be a good tool to help in
the transition from traditional models to those primar-
ily based on student-centred approaches (Kolmos
2002).
Acknowledgements
The authors are very grateful to those who
participated in this study, especially the students
who agreed to take part and the teachers who
helped in choosing the questions and scoring the
tests. We also wish to thank Dr Luis Pérez Jurado
for allowing us to give the test to students during
his lessons. Special thanks to Dr Luis Branda for his
review of the manuscript and his suggestions that
have permitted us to improve a little more each
day. The English of this manuscript has been
proofread by Mr Chuck Simmonds, a native
English-speaking university instructor of English.
References
Albano, M.G., F. Cavallo, R. Hoogenboom, F. Magni, G. Majoor, F.
Manenti, L. Schuwirth, I. Stiegler, and C. Van der Vleuten. 1996. An
international comparison of knowledge levels of medical students: The
Maastricht Progress Test. Medical Education 30: 239–45.
Barrows, H.S. 1988. The tutorial process. Illinois: Southern Illinois University
School of Medicine.
Berkson, L. 1993. Problem-based learning: have the expectations been met?
Academic Medicine 68, no. 10: S79–88.
235
Blake, R.L., M.C. Hosokawa, and S.L. Riley. 2000. Student performances
on Step 1 and Step 2 of the United States Medical Licensing Examina-
tion following implementation of a problem-based learning curriculum.
Academic Medicine 5, no. 1: 66–70.
Cantillon, P., L. Hutchinson, and D. Wood. 2003. ABC of learning and
teaching in medicine. London: BMJ Publishing Group.
De Grave, W.S., D.H. Dolmans, and C.P. Van der Vleuten. 1999. Profiles
of effective tutors in PBL: Scaffolding student learning. Medical Education
33: 901–6.
Dolmans, D.H., W. De Grave, I.H. Wolfhagen, and C.P. Van der Vleuten.
2005. Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice
and research. Medical Education 39: 732–41.
Farquhar, L.J., J. Haf, and K. Kotabe. 1986. Effect of two preclinical curric-
ula on NBME Part I examination performance. Journal of Medical Educa-
tion 61, no. 5: 368–73.
Hmelo-Silver, C.E. 2004. Problem-based learning: what and how students
learn. Educational Psychology Review 16, no. 3: 235–66.
Kaufman, D.M., and K.V. Mann. 1998. Comparing achievement on the
Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examination Part I of students in
conventional and problem-based learning curricula. Academic Medicine 73:
1211–3.
Koh, G.C.H., H.E. Khoo, M.L. Wong, and D.K. Koh. 2008. The effects of
problem-based learning during medical school on physician competency: A
systematic review. Canadian Medical Association Journal 178, no. 1: 34–41.
Kolmos, A. 2002. Facilitating change to a problem-based model. Interna-
tional Journal of Academic Development 7: 64–74.
Michel, M., A. Bischoff, and K.H. Jakobs. 2002. Comparison of problem-
and lecture-based pharmacology teaching. Trends in Pharmacological Science
23, no. 4: 168–70.
Norman, G.R., and H.G. Schmidt. 2000. Effectiveness of problem-based
learning curricula: Theory, practice and paper darts. Medical Education 34:
721–8.
Peters, A.S., R. Greenberger-Rosovsky, C. Crowder, S.D. Block, and G.T.
Moore. 2000. Long-term outcomes of the New Pathway Program at
Harvard Medical School: A randomized controlled trial. Academic Medi-
cine 75, no. 5: 470–9.
Prince, K.J., H. Van Mameren, N. Hylkema, J. Drukker, A.J. Scherpbier,
and C.P. Van Der Vleuten. 2003. Does problem-based learning lead to
deficiencies in basic science knowledge? An empirical case on anatomy.
Medical Education 37: 15–21.
Tiwari, A., P. Lai, M. So, and K. Yuen. 2006. A comparison of the effects
of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’
critical thinking. Medical Education 40: 547–54.
Vernon, D.T., and R.L. Blake. 1993. Does problem-based learning work? A
meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine 68, no. 7: 550–63.