Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32144733›Full record

Trial reportAging clinical and experimental research2021

Video-based learning versus traditional lecture-based learning for osteoporosis education: a randomized controlled trial.

Pojchong Chotiyarnwong, Wararat Boonnasa, Chayaporn Chotiyarnwong, Aasis Unnanuntana

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Effect of coordinator-based osteoporosis intervention on quality of life in patients with fragility fractures: a prospective randomized trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022
    Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
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

4 authors.

Pojchong ChotiyarnwongDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi district, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0287-222X
Wararat BoonnasaDepartment of Nursing Siriraj Hospital, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chayaporn ChotiyarnwongDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5622-9811
Aasis UnnanuntanaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, 2 Wanglang Road, Bangkoknoi district, Bangkok, 10700, Thailand. uaasis@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5742-298X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient education about osteoporosis is an important component of osteoporosis treatment.

aimTo compare the effectiveness of osteoporosis education between video-based learning and traditional lecture-based learning.

methodsParticipants who attended the Outpatient Department of Siriraj Hospital during June 2017 to November 2017 were recruited. Ten-question pre- and post-tests were used to evaluate participant osteoporosis knowledge. After finishing the pre-test, patients were randomized to receive osteoporosis education via either traditional lecture-based or video-based learning for 25 min. After the training, patient questions about the subject matter were answered, and then the post-test was administered. Change in score was compared between groups using non-inferiority test at a non-inferiority margin of - 1.

resultsOf 413 participants, 207 and 206 people were allocated to the lecture-based group and the video-based group, respectively. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, change in score between pre-test and post-test, or change in score between pre-test and retention test between groups. Non-inferiority test revealed the change in score after video-based learning to be non-inferior to traditional lecture-based learning at a difference of > - 1, α = 0.05 (p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Video-based osteoporosis education can be used as part of a fracture liaison service to provide essential information about osteoporosis to both patients and caregivers. Video-based education is an efficient and effective tool that will reduce dependency on clinicians to provide lecture-based osteoporosis instruction.

conclusionsSince video- and lecture-based education were found to be equally effective, a standard package for both education techniques should be developed and implemented for all patients.

Indexed as

Education, DistanceOsteoporosisPatient Education as TopicEducational StatusHumansVideo RecordingFracture liaison serviceLecture-based learningOsteoporosis educationRandomized controlled trialVideo-based learning

Identifiers

PMID32144733

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.