SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2019
Online Digital Education for Postregistration Training of Medical Doctors: Systematic Review by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.
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 35 papers, 8 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spaced Digital Education for Health Professionals: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Pooled it
- Digital Health Professions Education in the Field of Pediatrics: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Health Professions Digital Education on Antibiotic Management: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Digital Education on Communication Skills Among Medical Students: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Virtual Patient Simulations in Health Professions Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Digital Education of Health Professionals on the Management of Domestic Violence: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Offline Digital Education for Postregistration Health Professions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Digital Problem-Based Learning in Health Professions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by the Digital Health Education Collaboration.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Pooled it
- Similar Outcomes of Web-Based and Face-to-Face Training of the GRADE Approach for the Certainty of Evidence: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Digital Solutions in HF Education: What Can Patients and Clinicians Gain?Current heart failure reports · 2026Review
- Clinical Nurses' Expectations and Experiences of Self-Directed Online Training in Evidence-Based Practice: A Qualitative Study - #EvidencerProject.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
- Assessing self-directed learning readiness among Indian medical graduates: Implications for educators and policymakers.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Development, Usability, and Effect of a Hypertension Mobile Application on Knowledge and Guidelines Adherence among Family and Community Medicine Residents: A Before-and-After Educational Intervention Study.Acta medica Philippina · 2025Article
- Learning effect of online versus onsite education in health and medical scholarship - protocol for a cluster randomized trial.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Comparing Face-to-Face, Blended and Online Teaching Approaches for Practical Skill Acquisition: A Randomised Controlled Trial.Medical science educator · 2024Article
- Development of Web-Based Education Modules to Improve Carer Engagement in Cancer Care: Design and User Experience Evaluation of the e-Triadic Oncology (eTRIO) Modules for Clinicians, Patients, and Carers.JMIR medical education · 2024Article
- Prioritizing post-COVID-19 health research in sub-Saharan Africa: A modified Delphi study for future pandemic.Scientific African · 2024Article
- Evaluating the impact of the supporting the advancement of research skills (STARS) programme on research knowledge, engagement and capacity-building in a health and social care organisation in England.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Improving self-directed learning ability of medical students using the blended teaching method: a quasi-experimental study.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Evaluation of an Instructional Video and Simulation Model for Teaching Slit Lamp Examination to Medical Students.Journal of academic ophthalmology (2017) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGlobally, online and local area network-based (LAN) digital education (ODE) has grown in popularity. Blended learning is used by ODE along with traditional learning. Studies have shown the increasing potential of these technologies in training medical doctors; however, the evidence for its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is unclear.
objectiveThis systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of online and LAN-based ODE in improving practicing medical doctors' knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction (primary outcomes), practice or behavior change, patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness (secondary outcomes).
methodsWe searched seven electronic databased for randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized trials, and quasi-randomized trials from January 1990 to March 2017. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We have presented the findings narratively. We mainly compared ODE with self-directed/face-to-face learning and blended learning with self-directed/face-to-face learning.
resultsA total of 93 studies (N=16,895) were included, of which 76 compared ODE (including blended) and self-directed/face-to-face learning. Overall, the effect of ODE (including blended) on postintervention knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction, practice or behavior change, and patient outcomes was inconsistent and ranged mostly from no difference between the groups to higher postintervention score in the intervention group (small to large effect size, very low to low quality evidence). Twenty-one studies reported higher knowledge scores (small to large effect size and very low quality) for the intervention, while 20 studies reported no difference in knowledge between the groups. Seven studies reported higher skill score in the intervention (large effect size and low quality), while 13 studies reported no difference in the skill scores between the groups. One study reported a higher attitude score for the intervention (very low quality), while four studies reported no difference in the attitude score between the groups. Four studies reported higher postintervention physician satisfaction with the intervention (large effect size and low quality), while six studies reported no difference in satisfaction between the groups. Eight studies reported higher postintervention practice or behavior change for the ODE group (small to moderate effect size and low quality), while five studies reported no difference in practice or behavior change between the groups. One study reported higher improvement in patient outcome, while three others reported no difference in patient outcome between the groups. None of the included studies reported any unintended/adverse effects or cost-effectiveness of the interventions.
conclusionsEmpiric evidence showed that ODE and blended learning may be equivalent to self-directed/face-to-face learning for training practicing physicians. Few other studies demonstrated that ODE and blended learning may significantly improve learning outcomes compared to self-directed/face-to-face learning. The quality of the evidence in these studies was found to be very low for knowledge. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings.
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.