Aims:
The present study was carried out for comparative evaluation of case-based learning (CBL) aided with WhatsApp and didactic lectures (DL) while teaching a pathology topic to second-year medical students. In addition, the acceptability of WhatsApp as an aid to CBL was assessed.
Material and Methods:
After obtaining informed consent, 70 second-year Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) students were exposed to six sessions of CBL aided by case scenarios for one set of topics of anemia posted on WhatsApp groups. This was followed by six sessions of DL for separate set of topics in anemia. The multiple-choice questions (MCQ) test scores obtained pre and postintervention, of CBL and DL sessions, were compared to paired t-test (within the groups) and Student's t-test (between the groups). Categorical data were analyzed using Chi-square (χ2) test. Student's self-administered questionnaires and focus group discussions (FGDs) were used to collect student perceptions and analyzed quantitatively, as well as qualitatively.
Results:
The mean MCQ scores obtained postintervention in CBL topics were significantly higher compared to DL (22.78 ± 2.99 vs 17.78 ± 3.35; P < 0.001). Students perceived that CBL enhanced their curiosity; hence, the acquired knowledge through various resources was retained better. It enhanced their analytical skills and interest in learning pathology. In FGDs, the students appreciated the use of WhatsApp as an aid to CBL for its ease of sharing scenario-related additional information and prior discussions among themselves in chat groups at their convenience.
Conclusion:
CBL aided by WhatsApp helped students acquire knowledge, discuss and learn actively, score more, and retain better than DL. Using WhatsApp as a platform helped them to interact at their ease and seek guidance from their mentors without resistance and hesitation.
Autopsy significantly adds to the prenatal USG diagnosis and may help in predicting the probability of recurrence, and thus counseling the affected couple to prevent any such future event.
Purpose Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is a widely used indicator of inflammation and a routinely done hematology investigation to monitor patients of autoimmune and infectious diseases. We aimed to compare the ESR results obtained by Roller 20LC automated instrument and standard reference Westergren method and analyzed the effect of anemia (hematocrit) on ESR measurements through the automated method.
Methods We analyzed 1377 random anemic OPD patients (hematocrit [HCT] < 35%) for ESR levels measured by Roller 20LC using EDTA blood and Westergren method using citrated blood for a one and half year period from January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019. Fabry’s formula was used to correct the Westergren ESR.
Results The total number of samples after evaluation were divided into low (n = 232), intermediate (n = 417), high (n = 406), and very high range of ESR (≥100 mm/hr; n = 422). Mean difference between values of corrected and automated ESR for the low, intermediate, high and very high ESR range was 2.33 ± 5.03, 10.95 ± 8.04, 28.22 ± 19.11 and 43.3 ± 19.22 mm/hr, respectively. The 95% limit of agreement calculated by the Bland–Altmann analysis between the two methods for low-ESR range was −7.53 to 12.2 (highest correlation coefficient –0.65), while for very high ESR, range was −5.1 to 81.5 (least coefficient of 0.18) (p < 0.001).
Conclusion In laboratories with high-sample load and where manual measurement may be tedious, the automated method of ESR measurement can safely replace the Westergren method for low-ESR values in patients with low hematocrit. While for high-ESR values, validation by the standard Westergren method may be needed.
PAL complemented by MIBAs may be adopted to make teaching-learning more interesting and effective through the active involvement and participation of students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.