Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30762583›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2019

Digital Education in Health Professions: The Need for Overarching Evidence Synthesis.

Josip Car, Jan Carlstedt-Duke, Lorainne Tudor Car, Pawel Posadzki, Penny Whiting, Nabil Zary, Rifat Atun, Azeem Majeed, James Campbell, Digital Health Education Collaboration

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 23 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 23 pooled it
–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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 23 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors.

Josip CarCentre for Population Health Sciences, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8969-371X
Jan Carlstedt-DukeNanyang Institute of Technology in Health and Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-7784-5296
Lorainne Tudor CarFamily Medicine and Primary Care, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8414-7664
Pawel PosadzkiCentre for Population Health Sciences, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-5153-3654
Penny WhitingBristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1138-5682
Nabil ZaryMedical Education Research and Scholarship Unit, Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8999-6999
Rifat AtunHarvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1531-5983
Azeem MajeedDepartment of Primary Care & Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2357-9858
James CampbellHealth Workforce Department, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-2294-2547
Digital Health Education Collaboration *

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials of digital health education poses some challenges. These include a lack of clear categorization of digital health education in the literature; constantly evolving concepts, pedagogies, or theories; and a multitude of methods, features, technologies, or delivery settings. The Digital Health Education Collaboration was established to evaluate the evidence on digital education in health professions; inform policymakers, educators, and students; and ultimately, change the way in which these professionals learn and are taught. The aim of this paper is to present the overarching methodology that we use to synthesize evidence across our digital health education reviews and to discuss challenges related to the process. For our research, we followed Cochrane recommendations for the conduct of systematic reviews; all reviews are reported according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidance. This included assembling experts in various digital health education fields; identifying gaps in the evidence base; formulating focused research questions, aims, and outcome measures; choosing appropriate search terms and databases; defining inclusion and exclusion criteria; running the searches jointly with librarians and information specialists; managing abstracts; retrieving full-text versions of papers; extracting and storing large datasets, critically appraising the quality of studies; analyzing data; discussing findings; drawing meaningful conclusions; and drafting research papers. The approach used for synthesizing evidence from digital health education trials is commonly regarded as the most rigorous benchmark for conducting systematic reviews. Although we acknowledge the presence of certain biases ingrained in the process, we have clearly highlighted and minimized those biases by strictly adhering to scientific rigor, methodological integrity, and standard operating procedures. This paper will be a valuable asset for researchers and methodologists undertaking systematic reviews in digital health education.

Indexed as

Health EducationHealth OccupationsHumansLearningeducation, distanceeducation, medicaleducation, professionalevidence-basedmethodssystematic reviews

Identifiers

PMID30762583
PMCPMC6393775

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.