Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31412864›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2019

Video feedback and e-Learning enhances laboratory skills and engagement in medical laboratory science students.

Rebecca Donkin, Elizabeth Askew, Hollie Stevenson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Evaluating e-Learning in the Pathology Course During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Advances in medical education and practice · 2022
    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

3 authors.

Rebecca DonkinSchool of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sippy Downs, 4556, Queensland, Australia. rdonkin@usc.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1869-4461
Elizabeth AskewSchool of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sippy Downs, 4556, Queensland, Australia.
Hollie StevensonSchool of Health and Sport Sciences, University of the Sunshine Coast, 90 Sippy Downs Drive, Sippy Downs, 4556, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraditionally, the training of medical laboratory science students has taken place in the laboratory and has been led by academic and pathology experts in a face-to-face context. In recent years, budgetary pressures, increasing student enrolments and limited access to laboratory equipment have resulted in reduced staff-student contact hours in medical laboratory science education. While this restructure in resources has been challenging, it has encouraged innovation in online blended learning.

methodsBlended learning histology lessons were implemented in a face-to-face and e-Learning format in a medical laboratory science program to teach tissue morphology and technical procedures outside of the traditional laboratory classroom. Participating students were randomly allocated to either the 'video' group (n = 14) or the 'control' group (n = 14). After all students attempted the e-Learning lessons and viewed expert-led video recordings online, students demonstrated their hands-on practical skills in the laboratory. Technical skills, demonstration of safety awareness, and use of histology equipment was captured by video through first person 'point of view' recordings for the 'video' group only. The 'control' group performed the same activities but were not recorded. Prior to summative assessment, the 'video' group students had a digital resource portfolio that enabled them to review their skills, receive captured feedback and retain a visual copy of their recorded procedure.

resultsResults showed that students who participated in the online video format had statistically better practical examination scores and final grades compared to the control group.

conclusionFindings from this study suggest that students are engaged and motivated when being taught in a blended learning format and respond positively to the use of video recordings with expert feedback for the initial learning of hands-on techniques. For the academic, developing a blended learning medical laboratory science program, which includes annotated virtual microscopy, video demonstrations, and online interactive e-Learning activities, provides an effective and economic approach to learning and teaching.

Indexed as

FeedbackStudents, MedicalVideo RecordingClinical ClerkshipClinical CompetenceCompetency-Based EducationComputer-Assisted InstructionEducation, DistanceHumansMedical Laboratory ScienceMotivationProgram EvaluationBlended learningInteractive learning environmentsMedia in educationMedical laboratory scienceSimulations

Identifiers

PMID31412864
PMCPMC6693214

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.