Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2017
Effects of Improving Primary Health Care Workers' Knowledge About Public Health Services in Rural China: A Comparative Study of Blended Learning and Pure E-Learning.
Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of global health capacity building initiatives in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review.Journal of global health · 2020Pooled it
- Blended Learning Compared to Traditional Learning in Medical Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Technology-Enabled Knowledge Translation Strategies in Improving the Use of Research in Public Health: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Pooled it
- Development and Assessment of a Gastroscopy Electronic Learning System for Primary Learners: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Trial
- Feasibility and acceptability of e-learning training about diabetes and insulin usage to Peruvian healthcare professionals.BMJ open quality · 2026Article
- Unraveling the Impact of Blended Learning vs. Online Learning on Learners' Performance: Perspective of Self-Determination Theory.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Trends and Patterns of Systemic Glucocorticoid Prescription in Primary Care Institutions in Southwest China, from 2018 to 2021.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2023Article
- Training primary healthcare workers in China's township hospitals: a mixed methods study.BMC family practice · 2020Article
- Competency building for lay health workers is an intangible force driving basic public health services in Southwest China.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- WeChat as a Platform for Problem-Based Learning in a Dental Practical Clerkship: Feasibility Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Preparing Public Health Professionals to Make Evidence-Based Decisions: A Comparison of Training Delivery Methods in the United States.Frontiers in public health · 2018Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary health care workers (PHCWs) are a major force in delivering basic public health services (BPHS) in rural China. It is necessary to take effective training approaches to improve PHCWs' competency on BPHS. Both electronic learning (e-learning) and blended learning have been widely used in the health workers' education. However, there is limited evidence on the effects of blended learning in comparison with pure e-learning.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a blended-learning approach for rural PHCWs in improving their knowledge about BPHS as well as training satisfaction in comparison with a pure e-learning approach.
methodsThe study was conducted among PHCWs in 6 rural counties of Hubei Province, China, between August 2013 and April 2014. Three counties were randomly allocated blended-learning courses (29 township centers or 612 PHCWs-the experimental group), and three counties were allocated pure e-learning courses (31 township centers or 625 PHCWs-the control group). Three course modules were administered for 5 weeks, with assessments at baseline and postcourse. Primary outcomes were score changes in courses' knowledge. Secondary outcome was participant satisfaction (5-point Likert scale anchored between 1 [strongly agree] and 5 [strongly disagree]).
resultsThe experimental group had higher mean scores than the control group in knowledge achievement in three course modules: (1) module 1: 93.21 (95% CI 92.49-93.93) in experimental group versus 88.29 (95% CI 87.19-89.40) in the control group; adjusted difference, 4.92 (95% CI 2.61-7.24; P<.001); (2) module 2: 94.05 (95% CI 93.37-94.73) in the experimental group vs 90.22 (95% CI 89.12-91.31) in the control group; adjusted difference, 3.67 (95% CI 1.17-6.18; P=.004); (3) module 3: 93.88 (95% CI 93.08-94.68) in the experimental group versus 89.09 (95% CI 87.89-90.30) in control group; adjusted difference, 4.63 (95% CI 2.12-7.14; P<.001). The participants in the experimental learning group gave more positive responses with the four issues than control group participants: (1) the increase of interest in learning, 1.85 (95% CI 1.22-2.80; P=.003); (2) the increase of interaction with others, 1.77 (95% CI 1.20-2.60; P=.004); (3) the satisfaction with learning experience, 1.78 (95% CI 1.11-2.88; P=.02); and (4) achievement of learning objectives, 1.63 (95% CI 1.08-2.48; P=.02).
conclusionsAmong PHCWs in rural China, a blended-learning approach to BPHS training could result in a higher knowledge achievement and satisfaction level compared with a pure e-learning approach. The findings of the study will contribute knowledge to improve the competency of PHCWs in similar settings.
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.