Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 23712

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionKey MessageReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri

"The Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) has been in operation since almost a decade. It has contributed a huge number of peer reviewed articles, across a spectrum of medical disciplines, to the medical literature.
Its wide based indexing and open access publications attracts many authors as well as readers
For authors, the manuscripts can be uploaded online through an easily navigable portal, on other hand, reviewers appreciate the systematic handling of all manuscripts. The way JCDR has emerged as an effective medium for publishing wide array of observations in Indian context, I wish the editorial team success in their endeavour"

Dr Bhanu K Bhakhri
Faculty, Pediatric Medicine
Super Speciality Paediatric Hospital and Post Graduate Teaching Institute, Noida
On Sep 2018

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dematolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2011 | Month : August | Volume : 5 | Issue : 4 | Page : 822 - 825

Is Small Group Teaching among the Under Graduate Dental Students Really Effective?

Rathnakar U.P., Sheetal D. Ullal, Preethi G. Pai, Rajeshwari S., Pemminati Sudhakar, Shivaprakash G. et al.

Assistant professor, Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India. Associate professor, Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India. Assistant professor, Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India. Assistant professor, Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India.5. Assistant professor, Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India. Corresponding Author. Professor, Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India. Assistant professor, Department of Community Medicine, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Manipal University, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Shivaprakash G., Assistant professor,
Department of pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College,
Mangalore, Manipal University, Karnataka, India - 575001.
Phone: +919449553742


Background: Lecturing to a large group is the usual mode of teaching in most of the dental colleges in India. Only little research has been done to examine the effectiveness of the different teaching styles. Effective teaching is required to produce more efficient dentists and hence an effort was made to compare two different teaching styles among the dental students.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of large group lectures with small group teaching among the undergraduate students of pharmacology.

Setting and Design: Department of Pharmacology, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore. Randomized cross over design to cover two topics in pharmacology.

Methods: Ninety seven students studying for the second year dental course were randomized into one large group and four small groups. Each group was taught two topics in pharmacologyeither by lectures to a large group or by the small group teaching method, with each group crossing over after the first session with the other topic. At the end of each class, the students were tested by using objective questions.

Statistical Analysis: The mean marks of each group were compared by using the Student’s t test.

Results: The mean marks of all the students in the four sub groups of group B, who were taught in small groups [BS = 43], 12.12 ± 2.2, P = 0.02, were found to be higher than the mean marks of the students in the large group A [AL]. The mean score of the four small groups of group A [AS = 44students], 12.30 ± 1.7, P = 0.01 was higher than that of group B in the large lecture group [BL].

Conclusion: The results of this study provide evidence that small group teaching is more effective and that it facilitates a better recollection of the topics than the large group lecture technique.


Large Group, Lecture, Small group discussion, The students’ preference of teaching

The impact of teaching plays a major role in the learning outcomes in higher education. This is more important in generating effective professionals. Its effectiveness depends on how much has been received by the students or the target audience. There are different methods of teaching; lectures, tutorials, seminars, by having a panel of experts, brainstorming, videotapes, class discussions, small group discussions, case studies, role playing etc.Among the medical and dental colleges in India, lecturing to a large class is the usual mode of teaching and small group teaching is only limited to the bed side clinics. Lecturing or large group teaching is one of the oldest forms of teaching. Whatever their reputation, lectures are an efficient means of transferring knowledge and concepts to large groups. They can be used to stimulate interest, explain concepts, provide core knowledge and to direct student learning. However, they should not be regarded as an effective way of teaching or encouraging higher order of thinking among students.

According to some research projects such as Tennessee’s STAR, reducing the size of the class will produce many benefits for the teachers and the students (1). Because of the small numbers, the students will receive more individual attention, the teachers will be able to manage the students better, discipline problems are likely to be less and there is more interaction between the students and the teachers. When the teacher spends less time for managing the students, more time can be utilized in teaching (2). Studies also show that promoting interactive sessions is equally important than just teaching to a mere small size of students (3). There is only very little research material that is available, which examines the effectiveness of the different teaching styles among the dental students in India. There are also disadvantages of small class such as need to employ large number of teachers, investment on infrastructure like construction of new class rooms may be a major issue especially in developing countries. An effort was made to check whether there was a requirement for a change in the teaching method in the education system in our country,which depends mainly on the large group teaching and to know about the students feedback on the teaching methods.

To compare the effectiveness of large group lectures with small group teaching method among the second year undergraduate students of dental surgery and also to know the student preference among the two methods of teaching.

Material and Methods

Study setting: Department of Pharmacology, K.M.C. Mangalore.

Design: Cross over design to cover two topics in pharmacology

Sample size: Ninety seven students

Subject selection: All the students who were present on the day of the study were offered the opportunity to participate in the study. Participation in the study was voluntary.

Ethical considerations: The study was carried out after obtaining the permission of the institutional ethical committee [Chairperson, Institutional Ethics Committee, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, Letter dated SEP 2009]. The previous sessional examination scores of the students were recorded after obtaining the informed consent from the students.

Pharmacology is taught during the second year of the four year course for under graduate students in dental surgery, in India. There were 97 students during the current study, in the year 2008–2009. They were stratified into four groups according to the mean marks which were obtained [Maximum marks=100] during the previous two sessional examinations. There were 19 students in the group who scored less than 49 marks, 33 students who scored 50-59 marks, 30 students with 60-69 marks and 15 who obtained 70 marks or more. These students were further randomized into two groups [A and B] by using computer generated random numbers. Each group was taught two topics in Pharmacology viz calcium metabolism and hormonal contraceptives. When the large group was being taught calcium metabolism [AL, n = 46], the other group [BS, n = 43] was randomly divided into four groups, each not of more than 15 students and they were taught the same subject in small groups, four teachers (4). All the teachers who participated in the study had a comparable experience of teaching dental students and had the same designation. The teachers were calibrated by predeciding the contents of both the chapters which had to be taught and by using the same teaching material. The duration of the class was 40 minutes. After one week, the students who were taught in the large groups were randomized into four small groups as was done earlier [AS, n = 44] for small group teaching and the students in the small groups were combined into one large group [BL, n = 43] for the lectures. The topic which was taught was hormonal contraceptives. The same teachers who taught topic 1 [Calcium metabolism] in first session were assigned to teach topic 2 [Hormonal contraceptives] to similar groups in the second session after crossover for 40 min. At the end of each of the classes, the students were tested with objective type of questions which were prepared by a teacher who was not involved in the study. There were 15 objective type questions and one mark was awarded for each correct answer. The maximum marks were for 15. The mean marks of each group were calculated and compared. All the students were also requested to give their opinion about the usefulness of the two methods of teaching.

The Student’s’ test was employed to compare the mean marks of the different groups. The data was analyzed by using the SPSS, version 14. P values which were <0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.


There were 89 students who were available for the first class [calcium metabolism]. The students in group A were taught calcium metabolism by lectures [AL]. The mean marks scored by the students [AL=46students] in the objective type of written test which was conducted at the end of the lecture were 10.96±2.7. The mean marks of all the students in the four sub groups of group B who were taught in small groups [BS=43], 12.12±2.2, were found to be higher than the mean marks which were scored by the students in the large group lectures [AL]. This difference between the groups, AL and BS was found to be statistically significant [p=0.02]. The mean marks of the students were also calculated after the next class [hormonal contraceptives, n=87]. During this session, the students who earlier were taught by [AL] the lecture method were now taught in four small groups [AS= 44students]. The mean score of this group was 12.30±1.7. The students in the other group, BS, now crossed over to the large group lecture B [BL=43]. Their mean score was 11.21±1.8, which was less than the marks which were scored by the students in the small group A [AS] 12.30±1.7. This difference was [AS and BL] also found to be statistically significant, p=0.01 (Table/Fig 1).The differences between the mean marks of the students in the two large group lectures [AL =10.96±2.7, BL=11.21±1.8] and the mean marks of the students in the two small groups [AS= 12.30±1.7, BS=12.12±2.2] were found to be statistically not significant, the p values being 0.63 and 0.67 respectively (Table/Fig 2).

The mean marks which were obtained by the same set of students after the large group lecture A [AL] and by the small group teaching [AS] were also compared. The difference in the marks [AL=10.96±2.7] [AS=12.30±1.7] between these groups was found to be statistically significant [p=0.02]. The difference in the mean marks which were scored by the other group of students in the large lecture [BL=11.21±1.8] and by the small group teaching[BS=12.12±2.2] was also found to be statistically significant, p=0.05 (Table/Fig 2).

When the students were asked their opinion about the usefulness of the two teaching methods, 50.57% of the students strongly agreed and 45.97% agreed that small group teaching was more useful. Three [3.44%] of the students could not decide about the teaching methods.


It is often suggested that lectures may not be the best way to impart knowledge to students (5). Though a majority of the medical and dental schools in India depend upon lecturing to a large group of students to impart knowledge, medical schools in U.S.A and Europe adopt small group teaching in medical programmes (6). Researchers have found that there are many advantages in teaching students in small groups. Some even say that “smaller classes are a key ingredient of student success” (7).

The present study too demonstrates that small group teaching is more effective than large group lectures. The effectiveness of small group teaching was demonstrated in the teaching of two different topics and similar significant results were obtained even when the groups crossed over from large group lectures to small group teaching. There was also no significant difference between the two lecture groups [BL and AL]. Statistically significant differences were also observed when the marks which were scored by the same group of students in the large group lecture were compared with the marks scored by the students in the small group teaching but in a different topic [Al and AS, BL and BS]. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean marks of the students in the two large group lecture classes [Al and BL] or in the two small groups [AS and BS].

The results from this study provide evidence that small group teaching is more effective and that it facilitates a better recollection of the material which is taught, than by lecturing to a large group, in the undergraduate teaching of Pharmacology among the students of dental surgery.

Not many similar studies are available for comparison among the dental colleges in India. Many of the studies which are available in the literature compare problem based learning [PBL] in the small groups with that in large group lectures. However, small group discussions are said to promote a deeper approach to learning than the large group lecture methods. Small groups provide more opportunities to ask questions (8).A study in which problem oriented small group [POSG] sessions were compared to the large group lectures, the students in the small groups were found to perform better (9). Curtis have also found that the students who were taught in small groups scored higher marks as compared to the scores in the subjects which were taught by the large group lectures (10). Hofer also concluded that small group teaching facilitated high quality results (11). However, there are some studies which have not positively favoured small groups (12), (13). White found that small group teaching was only as effective as the large group lectures approach and not superior to it (14). Xailers have found that small group teaching when supplemented by large group lectures, appeared to increase the student’s knowledge of the subjects which were being taught (15).

This study also throws some light on the student preferences about the two methods of teaching. More than 95% of students felt that small group teaching was a more useful method than large grouplectures. In a similar study, according to 86% of the students, small group discussions [SGD] helped them to understand the topics of discussion very well whereas 8% of the students said that SGD did not help (16).

Probably the small group study is more effective because the students are less distracted when in small groups, they remain focused, can easily get their doubts cleared and also there is more student-teacher interaction. There are many advantages of having a small class, but there are also disadvantages when implementing small classes in a professional college. Small group teaching programmes require more qualified teachers. As most of the professional colleges have only adequate teachers to conduct large group lecture classes, these institutions need to hire more teachers. Employing more teachers increases the expenditure of the teaching institutions. Reducing the class size is said to be the single most expensive item of the education reform (17).


In summary, this study provides evidence that small group teaching is a more effective method of teaching Pharmacology as compared to teaching the students of a large group. This trial also shows that the students prefer small group teaching to large group lectures. However, a larger study involving multiple colleges and other dental subjects is required before this finding can be generalized to other dental colleges in India.

Key Message

Small group teaching is a more effective teaching method than lecturing to a large group. Ninety six percent of the students preferred small group teaching.


Elizabeth Word, Helen Pate Bain, B. DeWayne Fulton, Jayne Boyd Zaharias, Charles M. Achilles, Martha Nannette Lintz et al., The State of Tennessee’s Student/Teacher Achievement Ratio (STAR) Project, Final Summary Report [monograph on the Internet]. Washington: U.S. Census Bureau; 2000 [cited 2009 April 15]. Available from: http://
Mike Kennedy. In Sizing up Smaller Classes [monograph on the Internet]. American school and university; 2003 [cited 2009 April 5]. Available from: http:// asumag. com/mag/ university_sizing_smaller _classes/.
Rathnakar, Gopalakrishna HN et al. Didactic Lectures and Interactive Sessions in Small groups. A Comparative Study among undergraduate students of Pharmacology in India. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2010 April ;(4):2260-2264
Anne Worrall-Davies. Successful Small Group Teaching. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 1999; 5: 376-381
Matthew L Costa, Lee van Rensburg, Neil Rushton. Does the teaching style matter? A randomized trial of group discussion versus lectures in orthopedic undergraduate teaching. Medical Education. 2007; 41: 214–7.
Shatzer JH. Instructional methods. Acad Med. 1998 Sep; 73 Supp 2:S38-45.
Randi Weingarten. The Case for Smaller Classes. Education update online. 2003 Sep [cited on 2009 April 5]. Available from: http://www.
Peyton R, Fry H, Hadfield-Law L, Harris D, Walker M.Training the Trainers: Learning and Teaching. London: Royal College of Surgeons of England 2003;778-799.
Dunnington G, Witzke D, Rubeck R, Beck A, Mohr J. Putnam C A comparison of the teaching effectiveness of the didactic lecture and the problem-oriented small group session: A prospective study. Surgery. 1987; 102(2):291-6.
Curtis JA, Indyk D, Taylor B. Successful use of problem-based learning in a third-year pediatric clerkship. Ambul 2001; 1(3):132-5.
Hofer M, Schiebel HG, Garten A, Innovative course concept for small group teaching in clinical methods. Results of a longitudinal, 2-cohort study in the setting of the medical didactic pilot project in Dusseldorf. Dtsch. 2000 Jun 9; 125(23):717-23.
Roche AM, Stubbs JM, Sanson, Fisher RW, Saunders JB. A controlled trial of educational strategies to teach medical students brief intervention skills for alcohol problems. Prev Med. 1997 Jan-Feb; 26(1):78-85.
Heale J, Davis D, Norman G, Woodward C, Neufeld V, Dodd P. Arandomized controlled trial assessing the impact of problem based versus didactic teaching methods in CME. Res Med Educ. 1988; 27:72-7.
White M, Michaud G, Pachev G, Lirenman D, Kolenc A, FitzGerald JM. Randomized trial of problem-based versus didactic seminars for disseminating evidence-based guidelines on asthma management to primary care physicians. J Health Prof. 2004 Fall; 24(4): 237-43.
Xakeliis GC, Rickner S, Stevenson F. Comparison of the knowledge acquired by students in small group seminars with and without a formal didactic component. Fam Med. 2005 Jan; 37(1):27-9.
Nasir Aziz, Rabail Nasir, Abdus Salam. Students’ Perception of Small Group Teaching: A Cross sectional study. MEJFM. 2008 Jun; 6(5): 37-40
Mark Sappenfield. As budgets shrink, class sizes expand. The Christian Science Monitor. 2003 March 11 [cited on March 4 2009]. Available from:

DOI and Others


JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)