What Are We Looking for in Computer-Based Learning Interventions in Medical Education? A Systematic Review

Abstract

BackgroundComputer-based learning (CBL) has been widely used in medical education, and reports regarding its usage and effectiveness have ranged broadly. Most work has been done on the effectiveness of CBL approaches versus traditional methods, and little has been done on the comparative effects of CBL versus CBL methodologies. These findings urged other authors to recommend such studies in hopes of improving knowledge about which CBL methods work best in which settings.ObjectiveIn this systematic review, we aimed to characterize recent studies of the development of software platforms and interventions in medical education, search for common points among studies, and assess whether recommendations for CBL research are being taken into consideration.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature published from 2003 through 2013. We included studies written in English, specifically in medical education, regarding either the development of instructional software or interventions using instructional software, during training or practice, that reported learner attitudes, satisfaction, knowledge, skills, or software usage. We conducted 2 latent class analyses to group articles according to platform features and intervention characteristics. In addition, we analyzed references and citations for abstracted articles.ResultsWe analyzed 251 articles. The number of publications rose over time, and they encompassed most medical disciplines, learning settings, and training levels, totaling 25 different platforms specifically for medical education. We uncovered 4 latent classes for educational software, characteristically making use of multimedia (115/251, 45.8%), text (64/251, 25.5%), Web conferencing (54/251, 21.5%), and instructional design principles (18/251, 7.2%). We found 3 classes for intervention outcomes: knowledge and attitudes (175/212, 82.6%), knowledge, attitudes, and skills (11.8%), and online activity (12/212, 5.7%). About a quarter of the articles (58/227, 25.6%) did not hold references or citations in common with other articles. The number of common references and citations increased in articles reporting instructional design principles (P=.03), articles measuring online activities (P=.01), and articles citing a review by Cook and colleagues on CBL (P=.04). There was an association between number of citations and studies comparing CBL versus CBL, independent of publication date (P=.02).ConclusionsStudies in this field vary highly, and a high number of software systems are being developed. It seems that past recommendations regarding CBL interventions are being taken into consideration. A move into a more student-centered model, a focus on implementing reusable software platforms for specific learning contexts, and the analysis of online activity to track and predict outcomes are relevant areas for future research in this field.

The effectiveness of virtual and augmented reality in health sciences and medical anatomy

“…It also has to be noted that these static images, even if mentally rotated can only produce an image that is assumed by the learner; however, it can be inaccurate as the mind is filling the gaps of the missing structures (Linn and Petersen, 1985;Liesefeld et al, 2015). With advances in educational technology these traditional resources can be supplemented by interactive multimedia learning tools (Walsh, 2014;Trelease, 2016) and interactive software that can be accompanied with both auditory and visual information (Taveira-Gomes et al, 2016).…”

Learning and Satisfaction in Webinar, Online, and Face-to-Face Instruction: A Meta-Analysis

“…Pursuing the same goal, we then conducted a forward search, using Google Scholar to identify studies that cited the included articles. We also consulted the reference lists of 12 earlier reviews and meta-analyses of online and distance education (Cook et al, 2008(Cook et al, , 2010Bernard et al, 2009;Means et al, 2009Means et al, , 2013Martin et al, 2014;Schmid et al, 2014;Liu et al, 2016;Margulieux et al, 2016;Taveira-Gomes et al, 2016;McKinney, 2017;Richmond et al, 2017). This second step of the literature search resulted in another three publications (Harned et al, 2014;Alnabelsi et al, 2015;Olson and McCracken, 2015) that met all the inclusion criteria.…”

Management Of On Line Learning Platforms In Medical Education

“…Chumley-Jones et al (2002) showed that there are few repositories or digital libraries that offer access to e-Learning materials. More recent studies showed that in the last years a higher number of software systems were developed, with a move into a more student-centered model, a focus on implementing reusable software platforms for specific learning contexts, and analysis of online activity to track and predict outcomes (Taveira-Gomes et al, 2016).…”