Search

Background: Recently, much attention has been given to e-learning in higher education as it provides better access to learning resources online, utilising technology – regardless of learners' geographical locations and timescale – to enhance learning. It has now become part of the mainstream in education in the health sciences, including medical, dental, public health, nursing, and other allied health professionals. Despite growing evidence claiming that e-learning is as effective as traditional means of learning, there is very limited evidence available about what works, and when and how e-learning enhances teaching and learning. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesise the factors – enablers and barriers – affecting e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) that have been reported in the medical literature. Methods: A systemic review of articles published on e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied & Complementary Medicine, DH-DATA, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Global Health, from 1980 through 2019, using 'Textword' and 'Thesaurus' search terms. All original articles fulfilling the following criteria were included: (1) e-learning was implemented in health sciences education, and (2) the investigation of the factors – enablers and barriers – about el-HSE related to learning performance or outcomes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, both relevant published and unpublished papers were searched. Data were extracted and quality appraised using QualSyst tools, and synthesised performing thematic analysis. Results: Out of 985 records identified, a total of 162 citations were screened, of which 57 were found to be of relevance to this study. The primary evidence base comprises 24 papers, with two broad categories identified, enablers and barriers, under eight separate themes: facilitate learning; learning in practice; systematic approach to learning; integration of e-learning into curricula; poor motivation and expectation; resource-intensive; not suitable for all disciplines or contents, and lack of IT skills. Conclusions: This study has identified the factors which impact on e-learning: interaction and collaboration between learners and facilitators; considering learners' motivation and expectations; utilising user-friendly technology; and putting learners at the centre of pedagogy. There is significant scope for better understanding of the issues related to enablers and facilitators associated with e-learning, and developing appropriate policies and initiatives to establish when, how and where they fit best, creating a broader framework for making e-learning effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health professionals and health professions educators (HPEs) worldwide were confronted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted standard practice and forced HPEs to develop creative, alternative modes of training and education. The ability of people to work successfully and efficiently in non-standard situations can be called adaptive expertise in which people quickly overcome changes in work requirements using their expert knowledge in novel ways. The objectives of the current study were to investigate how the adaptive expertise of a group of HPEs influenced perceived work performance in a non-standard situation and to see whether there were relationships between the level of adaptive expertise and academic ranking and work experience of HPEs. Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional, single-site study was conducted using a self-reported study tool about adaptive expertise developed by Carbonell et al. (2016), and three questions were asked about participants' perceptions of work performance, amount of work done, and teaching quality. The sample consisted of HPEs from the University of Twente, Netherlands. Results: Among 123 eligible participants, 40 individuals completed the survey. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin and Bartlett's Test of Sphericity indicated the adequacy of the sample size (KMO = 0.633, P < 0.0001). Participants were lecturers, senior lecturers, assistant professors, associate professors and full professors. The average adaptive expertise score of the sample was 4.18 ± 0.57 on a scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high). The domain and innovative skills are the principal distinct dimensions of adaptive expertise among HPEs. Professors showed higher adaptive expertise scores than the other ranks. Statistically significant correlations were found between scores of adaptive expertise and perceived work performance (r = 0.41, p < 0.05 and academic ranking (r = 0.42, p < 0.05). Adaptive expertise scores were not associated with work experience or HPEs' age. Conclusions: Our finding of a lack of relationships between self-reported level of adaptive expertise and experience and age but significant relationships with work performance and academic ranking of HPEs suggests that adaptive expertise is not auto-generated or acquired with seniority and experience but is a 'mastery' that should be developed deliberately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Students Training in Academia, Health, and Research (STAHR) Program at the University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) strives to help students from low-income families that have experienced educational challenges due to poverty and prepare them to enter, persist, and graduate from a health sciences degree program at UMKC. Students in the program participated in fuzzy cognitive mapping (FCM) sessions to ensure that all voices of the program were heard to improve program implementation, and student success, and contribute to an equitable educational environment. Methods: Fuzzy Cognitive Mapping sessions for the 2020–2021 cohort of students (n = 52) were conducted to assess the strengths and weaknesses in program implementation, especially through the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Students' maps were coded by a team of researchers and then confirmed using confirmatory factor analysis. Results: Statistical analyses reveal that mentorship, workshops, and social support helped students to work toward their goal of obtaining a professional health sciences degree, while a lack of time, remote learning, and outside stressors inhibited their opportunities for success. Conclusions: The findings from a multipronged analysis of mapping data demonstrate the value of this innovative approach to the field, especially when looking to incorporate student voices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Recently, much attention has been given to e-learning in higher education as it provides better access to learning resources online, utilising technology – regardless of learners’ geographical locations and timescale – to enhance learning. It has now become part of the mainstream in education in the health sciences, including medical, dental, public health, nursing, and other allied health professionals. Despite growing evidence claiming that e-learning is as effective as traditional means of learning, there is very limited evidence available about what works, and when and how e-learning enhances teaching and learning. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesise the factors – enablers and barriers – affecting e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) that have been reported in the medical literature. Methods A systemic review of articles published on e-learning in health sciences education (el-HSE) was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied & Complementary Medicine, DH-DATA, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Global Health, from 1980 through 2019, using ‘Textword’ and ‘Thesaurus’ search terms. All original articles fulfilling the following criteria were included: (1) e-learning was implemented in health sciences education, and (2) the investigation of the factors – enablers and barriers – about el-HSE related to learning performance or outcomes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, both relevant published and unpublished papers were searched. Data were extracted and quality appraised using QualSyst tools, and synthesised performing thematic analysis. Results Out of 985 records identified, a total of 162 citations were screened, of which 57 were found to be of relevance to this study. The primary evidence base comprises 24 papers, with two broad categories identified, enablers and barriers, under eight separate themes: facilitate learning; learning in practice; systematic approach to learning; integration of e-learning into curricula; poor motivation and expectation; resource-intensive; not suitable for all disciplines or contents, and lack of IT skills. Conclusions This study has identified the factors which impact on e-learning: interaction and collaboration between learners and facilitators; considering learners’ motivation and expectations; utilising user-friendly technology; and putting learners at the centre of pedagogy. There is significant scope for better understanding of the issues related to enablers and facilitators associated with e-learning, and developing appropriate policies and initiatives to establish when, how and where they fit best, creating a broader framework for making e-learning effective.

Background: Most health care professionals get their start in academics without formal teaching training. As such, institutions encourage participation in opportunities to address gaps in faculty's knowledge of pedagogy and learning theory in order to promote both successful student and patient outcomes. This study aimed to examine the reception of a faculty development program focused on teaching participants the basics of course design. Methods: Applying a mixed-method approach, this retrospective study used pre/post-tests, assignment grades, self-assessment questionnaires, and focus groups to elucidate the impact of the faculty development intervention on course design. The participants (n = 12) were health educators from a private all-graduate level university with campus locations across the United States, including in the Southwest and Midwest. In the Course Design Institute (CDI), the participating faculty learned evidence-based instructional approaches and techniques to implement contemporary teaching practices. Results: The data from the pre/post-tests and focus groups suggest that participants learned about topics including instructional alignment, learning goals and objectives, instructional strategies, assessment planning, feedback approaches, communicating expectations, and adult learning theories by participating in this course. The final deliverable scores indicate that the CDI graduates were able to apply a backward design process to plan their own instruction. Data from both the survey and the focus groups suggest that participants were satisfied with the experience and particularly appreciated that the course was relevant to them as educators in the health sciences. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that the CDI was influential in developing the faculty's knowledge of the course design process, promoted the application of course design and pedagogy skills amongst CDI graduates, and positively impacted self-reported attitudes about their teaching abilities. In addition, feedback from participants indicates that they recognized the value of this program in their own development and they believed it should be a required course for all educators at the institution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aims to analyse the effectiveness of distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate health sciences students using systematic review. Online learning has been chosen as the best approach to continue offering education in this pandemic era. Method: The screening process was done using Scopus, ScienceDirect and PubMed based on the eligibility criteria. Out of 1486 studies, 1269 were screened. A total of 64 eligible studies obtained were included in the quantitative analysis. Results were categorized into i) student attitudes (perceptions/satisfactions/engagements), and ii) student learning outcomes, and compared to the Kirkpatrick model. Results: Although facing difficulties, 50% of the studies was moderately satisfied with distance learning, while 36% was highly satisfied and 17% dissatisfied. Most studies (26%) reported flexibility in online learning. Internet issues (19%) and low interaction between learners and instructors (19%) were the most prevalent problems mentioned. Online education engages students better than traditional learning. The learning outcome was assessed using two categories: i) academic performance and ii) skill development. Most studies (72%) stated that online learning improves academic performance, 14% reported a drop, and 14% stated no effect, while an increase in clinical skills and communication skills were reported. Kirkpatrick evaluation revealed 80% of the studies obtained was evaluated at level 1 (reaction), 8% at level 2 (learning), 12% at level 3 (behaviour) and none at level 4 (results). Conclusion: Overall, this systematic review found that the online learning performed better than expected during COVID-19, but the data gained is insufficient to say it is beneficial when compared to other types of teaching approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Compassion, one of the items of empathy, is crucial in health care professions. So, the evaluation of the levels of compassion of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences Master Degrees' (M.D.) students of the public Colleges in Portugal according to the type of Master Degree and the participation in extracurricular activities (E.A.) was a task to be performed. Methods: Cross-sectional study in 2020, applying an on-line questionnaire including the "Compassion" items of the Jefferson Medical Empathy Scale – Students' version and questions about the participation in E.A. Results: A sample of 901 students was studied. Its distribution by participation in E.A. did not differ significantly between M.D. (p = 0,854), most of the students participating in E.A. Using quartile distribution of compassion, the distribution of compassion levels was different among the three I.M. (p < 0.001), between Colleges (p < 0.001), and between curricular years (p < 0.001), with not different between genders (p = 0.036). For 56.4%, 74,6% and 69,5% of the respondents there was "medium-low" and "low" compassion for I.M. in Medicine, Pharmaceutical Sciences and Dentistry. These levels were also more prevalent among students in the 1st and 5th years. Levels of compassion were not different with the participation (p = 0,865), type (p = 0,177) and frequency of E.A. (p = 0,109). Conclusions: For their importance in future health care professionals, compassion and their differences found among the M.Ds. of this area deserve future studies. Levels of compassion showed differences between the M.D. studied and academic years of frequency. There was no relationship between the participation, type, and frequency of E.A. and the students' levels of compassion. The distribution of the level of compassion did not vary significantly with participation in E.A. (p = 0.865), with the type of E.A. (p = 0.177), with the frequency of E.A. (p = 0.109) or with the answer to the question "The practice of E.A. can make a person more compassionate?" (p = 0.503). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]