ArticleJournal of medical systems2016
An Empirical Study of Neural Network-Based Audience Response Technology in a Human Anatomy Course for Pharmacy Students.
Article in Journal of medical systems, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents an empirical study of a formative neural network-based assessment approach by using mobile technology to provide pharmacy students with intelligent diagnostic feedback. An unsupervised learning algorithm was integrated with an audience response system called SIDRA in order to generate states that collect some commonality in responses to questions and add diagnostic feedback for guided learning. A total of 89 pharmacy students enrolled on a Human Anatomy course were taught using two different teaching methods. Forty-four students employed intelligent SIDRA (i-SIDRA), whereas 45 students received the same training but without using i-SIDRA. A statistically significant difference was found between the experimental group (i-SIDRA) and the control group (traditional learning methodology), with T (87) = 6.598, p < 0.001. In four MCQs tests, the difference between the number of correct answers in the first attempt and in the last attempt was also studied. A global effect size of 0.644 was achieved in the meta-analysis carried out. The students expressed satisfaction with the content provided by i-SIDRA and the methodology used during the process of learning anatomy (M = 4.59). The new empirical contribution presented in this paper allows instructors to perform post hoc analyses of each particular student's progress to ensure appropriate training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.