ArticleJournal of medical imaging and radiation sciences2020
Évaluation d'un dispositif de continuité pédagogique à distance mis en place auprès d'étudiants MERM pendant le confinement sanitaire lié au COVID-19.
Article in Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe specific context related to the COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the implementation of distance learning continuity for students. In France, teachers and radiography students in initial training, not specially prepared for this, had to adapt. An evaluation of the system was proposed to the students. MATERIALS AND
methodsAn anonymous online questionnaire with 4 main sections (pedagogy, communication, learning and concerns) was sent to 91 students at the end of the semester.
results91 responses were received. The slideshows with sound or presented during a virtual class are appreciated by the students. Online quizzes are ideal for learning/reviewing. For assessments, individual assignments and online questionnaires are appreciated. Teacher/student interaction via e-mail or video conferencing was considered satisfactory by the large majority of students. Student-student interactions via social networks, for course explanations or document exchange, are very suitable. The majority of students felt they were working a lot and much more compared to face-to-face teaching. Less than half of the students worked more than 20 h per week. Their motivation varied widely. Organizational habits were disrupted, but the autonomy granted was appreciated. The students were mainly concerned about the health of their loved ones and not about their own health. DISCUSSION: The use of distance education tools requires teacher commitment and technical skills. The frequency of communication by e-mail and/or videoconference between members of the teaching team and students must be adapted to the situation. Exchanges by e-mail allow for traceability, while videoconferencing allows direct interaction and a way out of isolation. Autonomy, appreciated by the students, was nevertheless combined with a strong variation in motivation; the anxiety-provoking period in which pedagogical continuity was built up may explain this contradictory observation.
conclusionThe results obtained largely confirm the data in the literature. The experience gained through this survey should lead teachers to continue their reflection by test/integrating and evaluating distance education systems, while continuing face-to-face activities.
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.