Online virtual cases to teach resource stewardship

Zhou, Linghong Linda; Sandhu, Sharron; Steiman, Amanda; Lake, Shirley

doi:10.1111/tct.12804

Cited by 10 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Twenty-two studies [13,16,19,22,23,26,[30][31][32][33][34]39,40,[43][44][45]48,50,[52][53][54][55] provided analysis of implementation costs in eLearning without comparison to other learning platforms.…”

Section: Studies Describing Elearning Costs Without a Comparatormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McDuffie et al [33] No explicit cost methodology/technique described 6 2630 400 Asynchronous Moreno-Ger et al [34] No explicit cost methodology/technique described 506 5000 9 Synchronous Palmer et al [39] Total curriculum delivery N/A 32,685 N/A Asynchronous Pentiak et al [40] No explicit cost methodology/technique described [48] No explicit cost methodology/technique described 70 21,000 273 Asynchronous Thomas et al [49] No explicit cost methodology/technique described 49 44,986 803 Asynchronous de Ruijter et al [50] No explicit cost methodology/technique described 33 3732 103 Asynchronous Williams et al [52] Did not report total cost 38 N/A 679 Asynchronous Young et al [53] Did not report total cost 148 N/A 48 Asynchronous Zhou et al [54] a These studies are given the prefix "SUM" to indicate that this group represents a summary of costs without a comparator; the prefix and number can be used to provide a unique ID to refer to studies. b N/A: not available/applicable.…”

Section: N/a 382 Blendedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring the Cost of eLearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review

Meinert¹,

Eerens²,

Banks³

et al. 2021

JMIR Med Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Existing research on the costs associated with the design and deployment of eLearning in health professions education is limited. The relative costs of these learning platforms to those of face-to-face learning are also not well understood. The lack of predefined costing models used for eLearning cost data capture has made it difficult to complete cost evaluation. Objective The key aim of this scoping review was to explore the state of evidence concerning cost capture within eLearning in health professions education. The review explores the available data to define cost calculations related to eLearning. Methods The scoping review was performed using a search strategy with Medical Subject Heading terms and related keywords centered on eLearning and cost calculation with a population scope of health professionals in all countries. The search was limited to articles published in English. No restriction was placed on literature publication date. Results In total, 7344 articles were returned from the original search of the literature. Of these, 232 were relevant to associated keywords or abstract references following screening. Full-text review resulted in 168 studies being excluded. Of these, 61 studies were excluded because they were unrelated to eLearning and focused on general education. In addition, 103 studies were excluded because of lack of detailed information regarding costs; these studies referred to cost in ways either indicating cost favorability or unfavorability, but without data to support findings. Finally, 4 studies were excluded because of limited cost data that were insufficient for analysis. In total, 42 studies provided data and analysis of the impact of cost and value in health professions education. The most common data source was total cost of training (n=29). Other sources included cost per learner, referring to the cost for individual students (n=13). The population most frequently cited was medical students (n=15), although 12 articles focused on multiple populations. A further 22 studies provide details of costing approaches for the production and delivery of eLearning. These studies offer insight into the ways eLearning has been budgeted and project-managed through implementation. Conclusions Although cost is a recognized factor in studies detailing eLearning design and implementation, the way cost is captured is inconsistent. Despite a perception that eLearning is more cost-effective than face-to-face instruction, there is not yet sufficient evidence to assert this conclusively. A rigorous, repeatable data capture method is needed, in addition to a means to leverage existing economic evaluation methods that can then test eLearning cost-effectiveness and how to implement eLearning with cost benefits and advantages over traditional instruction.

show abstract

Section: Studies Describing Elearning Costs Without a Comparatormentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: N/a 382 Blendedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Cost of eLearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review

Meinert¹,

Eerens²,

Banks³

et al. 2021

JMIR Med Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this study we used two virtual patient platforms, Virtual Interactive Case system (VIC) ( Figure 3) (Zhou, Taite, Sandhu, Steiman, & Lake, 2018) and Web SP ( Figure 4) (Zary, Johnson, Boberg, & Fors, 2006). In the virtual patient platform, the learners are presented with a patient scenario and they have the opportunity to interact with the virtual patient through the computer.…”

Section: Format Of the Virtual Patients In The Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As in patient encounters, the students can carry out their assessment in any order they choose. Both systems were exploratory and semi-linear in design which means that they enable free navigation between the different sections for data collection (for example patient interview, physical examination and diagnostic tests) Zhou et al, 2018).The design of the virtual patient cases used in the different studies was based on the on the virtual patient Nursing Design Model (vpNDM) (Georg & Zary, 2014). This model is described in greater detail in Section 6.1.…”

Section: Format Of the Virtual Patients In The Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the development of the rubric, all students (n=102) who had interacted with a virtual patient case developed in the virtual interactive case system (VIC) (Toronto General Hospital, 2017;Zhou et al, 2018) were invited to take part in the study, 97 agreed to take part in the study. In phase two,-testing the rubric, 28 nursing students who had interacted with virtual patient cases developed in the Web-SP system (Zary et al, 2006) were invited and were included in the study.…”

Section: Study IIImentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation