Abstract
To evaluate the effectiveness of case-based learning (CBL) versus alternate learning methods on learning competencies and student satisfaction among healthcare students. A systematic search of the PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases was conducted from database inception to December 31, 2021. The grey literature, Google Scholar, and hand searching were also conducted. The keywords used were "case-based learning," "case learning," "traditional learning," "problem-based learning," "simulation-based learning," "learning competenc*," "competenc*," "student satisfaction," "satisfaction," "medic*," "dent*," "nursing" "pharmac*," "students," "undergraduate," "postgraduate," and "clerkship." Only studies comparing CBL methods with a control group or with an alternate learning method conducted on healthcare students were considered. The risk of bias was assessed independently by two reviewers. Data analysis was undertaken using RevMan 5.4. Twenty-two studies were included in the final review, of which 20 studies compared CBL with lecture-based learning (LBL) and two compared CBL with simulation-based learning. Pooled data demonstrated that critical thinking scores were significantly higher among those receiving CBL than those receiving LBL (standardized mean difference (SMD): 0.75, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.21-1.29). Similarly, significantly greater scores for teamwork and communication were identified in the CBL group than in the LBL groups (SMD: 0.24; 95%CI: -0.19-0.66). However, no significant difference in knowledge and comprehension scores (SMD: 0.41; 95%CI: 0.20-0.62) and self-directed learning (SMD: 0.30; 95%CI: 0.10-0.49) was identified among those who received CBL compared to those who received LBL. Based on the results of this review, CBL has been identified as a superior teaching method as it significantly improves critical thinking, problem-solving, teamwork, and communication skills and enhances clinical skills development and student satisfaction. However, more rigorous RCTs are needed to underpin the available evidence.