↓ Skip to main content

Using concept mapping to evaluate knowledge structure in problem-based learning

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
170 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Using concept mapping to evaluate knowledge structure in problem-based learning
Published in
BMC Medical Education, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12909-015-0496-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chia-Hui Hung, Chen-Yung Lin

Abstract

Many educational programs incorporate problem-based learning (PBL) to promote students' learning; however, the knowledge structure developed in PBL remains unclear. The aim of this study was to use concept mapping to generate an understanding of the use of PBL in the development of knowledge structures. Using a quasi-experimental study design, we employed concept mapping to illustrate the effects of PBL by examining the patterns of concepts and differences in the knowledge structures of students taught with and without a PBL approach. Fifty-two occupational therapy undergraduates were involved in the study and were randomly divided into PBL and control groups. The PBL group was given two case scenarios for small group discussion, while the control group continued with ordinary teaching and learning. Students were asked to make concept maps after being taught about knowledge structure. A descriptive analysis of the morphology of concept maps was conducted in order to compare the integration of the students' knowledge structures, and statistical analyses were done to understand the differences between groups. Three categories of concept maps were identified as follows: isolated, departmental, and integrated. The students in the control group constructed more isolated maps, while the students in the PBL group tended toward integrated mapping. Concept Relationships, Hierarchy Levels, and Cross Linkages in the concept maps were significantly greater in the PBL group; however, examples of concept maps did not differ significantly between the two groups. The data indicated that PBL had a strong effect on the acquisition and integration of knowledge. The important properties of PBL, including situational learning, problem spaces, and small group interactions, can help students to acquire more concepts, achieve an integrated knowledge structure, and enhance clinical reasoning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Hong Kong 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 166 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 19 11%
Lecturer 17 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 7%
Researcher 10 6%
Other 39 23%
Unknown 49 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 27 16%
Social Sciences 24 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 13%
Psychology 9 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 53 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 December 2015.
All research outputs
#6,904,135
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,190
of 3,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,390
of 387,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#16
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 387,438 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.