BackgroundInterpreting an electrocardiogram (ECG) is not only one of the most important parts of clinical diagnostics but also one of the most difficult topics to teach and learn. In order to enable medical students to master ECG interpretation skills in a limited teaching period, the flipped teaching method has been recommended by previous research to improve teaching effect on undergraduate ECG learning.MethodsA randomized controlled trial for ECG learning was conducted, involving 181 junior-year medical undergraduates using a flipped classroom as an experimental intervention, compared with Lecture-Based Learning (LBL) as a control group. All participants took an examination one week after the intervention by analysing 20 ECGs from actual clinical cases and submitting their ECG reports. A self-administered questionnaire was also used to evaluate the students’ attitudes, total learning time, and conditions under each teaching method.ResultsThe students in the experimental group scored significantly higher than the control group (8.72 ± 1.01 vs 8.03 ± 1.01, t = 4.549, P = 0.000) on ECG interpretation. The vast majority of the students in the flipped classroom group held positive attitudes toward the flipped classroom method and also supported LBL. There was no significant difference (4.07 ± 0.96 vs 4.16 ± 0.89, Z = − 0.948, P = 0.343) between the groups. Prior to class, the students in the flipped class group devoted significantly more time than those in the control group (42.33 ± 22.19 vs 30.55 ± 10.15, t = 4.586, P = 0.000), whereas after class, the time spent by the two groups were not significantly different (56.50 ± 46.80 vs 54.62 ± 31.77, t = 0.317, P = 0.752).ConclusionFlipped classroom teaching can improve medical students’ interest in learning and their self-learning abilities. It is an effective teaching model that needs to be further studied and promoted.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-017-0881-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundWe aimed to introduce team-based learning (TBL) as one of the teaching methods for diagnostics and to compare its teaching effectiveness with that of the traditional teaching methods.MethodsWe conducted a randomized controlled trial on diagnostics teaching involving 111 third-year medical undergraduates, using TBL as the experimental intervention, compared with lecture-based learning as the control, for teaching the two topics of symptomatology. Individual Readiness Assurance Test (IRAT)-baseline and Group Readiness Assurance Test (GRAT) were performed in members of each TBL subgroup. The scores in Individual Terminal Test 1 (ITT1) immediately after class and Individual Terminal Test 2 (ITT2) 1 week later were compared between the two groups. The questionnaire and interview were also implemented to survey the attitude of students and teachers toward TBL.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups in ITT1 (19.85±4.20 vs 19.70±4.61), while the score of the TBL group was significantly higher than that of the control group in ITT2 (19.15±3.93 vs 17.46±4.65). In the TBL group, the scores of the two terminal tests after the teaching intervention were significantly higher than the baseline test score of individuals. IRAT-baseline, ITT1, and ITT2 scores of students at different academic levels in the TBL teaching exhibited significant differences, but the ITT1-IRAT-baseline and ITT2-IRAT-baseline indicated no significant differences among the three subgroups.ConclusionOur TBL in symptomatology approach was highly accepted by students in the improvement of interest and self-directed learning and resulted in an increase in knowledge acquirements, which significantly improved short-term test scores compared with lecture-based learning. TBL is regarded as an effective teaching method worthy of promoting.