Thank you for raising such an important question, Prof. Gamal. I agree with you that PBL is the best way as it provides an active way of learning, particularly when it takes the form of group discussions or seminars. I remember that my master and PhD preparatory courses were mainly based  on a huge number of seminar discussions of specific points. This way of learning is more interesting than traditional textbook-based one. However, integrating both methods would have a better impact. Now, there are several journals that are interested in medical educational methods, highlighting the importance of the topic you raised.

Thank you Dr Rashad  for your  interesting addition and I agree with you . It was successful method of learning in some univesrsities in our country.

It would be good to see whether or not you would like to follow the simulated client model or the CARMS ( Stokoe et al 2013, 2014 - video analysis approach or perhaps a merger of the two in order to address the reliability of assessment and the confidence with which you can send a practitioner out into the field.

PBL also needs the teacher to be clear about their role within the process as well as the theoretical underpinnings - I am currently using the PBL method within law teaching -and have simulated client process rather than CARMs but am thinking about how to use this so that it can be applied more readily for CPD and distance / e learning.

Have a look at the work of Paul Maharg amongst others albeit in a different domain for and analysis of the approach.

Thank  Dr Caroline for your interesting answer

We experienced in our university in faculty of medicine and Health sciences Problem-based learning (PBL) as an innovative  learning method that lead academic learning to work  with practice. The problems are selected from practice, possible solutions are found from the learning process and the learning is a transferable skill . In addition, PBL enables  education in some faculties of our university to link directly with continuing professional development (CPD), which considered as a mandatory requirements.

I think the issue you raised begs the question regarding ones metrics for success as well as ones understanding of the learning process.  I suggest the format for learning is likely less important for the purposes of declarative knowledge especially as highly motivated students will "succeed" despite what learning format is used.  Are physicians trained before PBL any more or less competent than those trained in the era of PBL? There is no doubt for most students (though not all)  that PBL is more enjoyable.  However we know there are major differences between novices and experts in the way they learn. For instances PBL uses more of a logical deductive approach to problem solving, whereas experts use a more forward inductive approach to learning.  Novices try to learn everything as they are not sure what is most relevant, whereas experts are more attuned to patterns of behavior - recognizing clusters of signs and symptoms.  Apprenticeship models provide opportunities to observe and reflect on what experts do. I think we need to think deeper about what do mean by success across what domains and types of learners (novices versus experts).  I suggest that large didactic lectures can be as effective and efficient in learning some types of information and can be very engaging. I think we need to consider what we want future doctors to know and consider different approaches to learning rather than abide by one set philosophy on learning. I discuss some of these issues in my thesis Toward an evidence-informed, theory-driven model for continuing medical education. 

https://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/14747

General, integrale and integrative medicine, with many practical approach, clinical case analysis and with comeback of causal (etiological) thinking, causal therapy and causal based prophylaxis.

Both PBL in  a small group setting as well as large didactic lecture with interactive engaging approach and bringing some sorts of practical approach or example is the way how learner will feel more involved, interested where ultimate result will be long term retention. I  agree it is always inmportant tyo know the stage of your learner but being said that both approach will be successful if delivered in efficient way depending on the learner.

What we REALLY have yet to understand (in spite of new and exciting developments) is how our current knowledge on how children learn translates into the way we learn as adults. 

Historically Medicine was SHOWED, not taught, as we grew into the current Graduate medical learning we somewhat went away from that model (Residency exempted). 

So in my view, be it PBL or traditional classroom teaching is doomed to be things of the past, with present and future technologies making it more common place to have a HUGE (look at the MOOCS of coursera and edx) theoretical / basic disciplines in a more user-paced way, we medicine professors will become more and more involved in the practical, role-model roles in the future.  

I think Problem based learning is the best method for teaching.

The best curriculum is the curriculum that addresses the local needs of each country i.e contextual, and should also satisfy the professional needs and the learners' needs.

I think problem-based learning and skills lab help the medical students to study not from lectures, but also from critical thinking and do practice. SOCA examinations (Student Oral Case Analysis) also help the students to learn how to diagnose and the treatment of the disease also

Causal and critical thinking! Plus hystory of medicine and humanistic education (psychology, etnology).