Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24850945›Full record

SynthesisAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2014

Effectiveness of E-learning in pharmacy education.

Sandra M Salter, Ajay Karia, Frank M Sanfilippo, Rhonda M Clifford

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Relationships Between Remote Asynchronous Lectures and Summative Assessment Performance in four Pharmacotherapeutics Courses.The Journal of pharmacy technology : jPT : official publication of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sandra M SalterSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Ajay KariaSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Frank M SanfilippoSchool of Population Health, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
Rhonda M CliffordSchool of Medicine and Pharmacology, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past 2 decades, e-learning has evolved as a new pedagogy within pharmacy education. As learners and teachers increasingly seek e-learning opportunities for an array of educational and individual benefits, it is important to evaluate the effectiveness of these programs. This systematic review of the literature examines the quality of e-learning effectiveness studies in pharmacy, describes effectiveness measures, and synthesizes the evidence for each measure. E-learning in pharmacy education effectively increases knowledge and is a highly acceptable instructional format for pharmacists and pharmacy students. However, there is limited evidence that e-learning effectively improves skills or professional practice. There is also no evidence that e-learning is effective at increasing knowledge long term; thus, long-term follow-up studies are required. Translational research is also needed to evaluate the benefits of e-learning at patient and organizational levels.

Indexed as

Computer-Assisted InstructionInternetLearningCurriculumEducational MeasurementEducational StatusEducation, PharmacyHumansStudents, Pharmacycomputer instructione-learningInternetknowledge assessmentpharmacy education

Identifiers

PMID24850945
PMCPMC4028592

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.