Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33109653›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Uncovering motivation and self-regulated learning skills in integrated medical MOOC learning: a mixed methods research protocol.

Renée A Hendriks, Peter G M de Jong, Wilfried F Admiraal, Marlies E J Reinders

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Renée A HendriksCenter for Innovation in Medical Education, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands r.a.hendriks@lumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-1932-6428
Peter G M de JongCenter for Innovation in Medical Education, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Wilfried F AdmiraalICLON Leiden University Graduate School of Teaching, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Marlies E J ReindersDepartment of Internal Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMassive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are informal learning environments. Since a few years, MOOCs are being reused and integrated in formal medical education. However, what constitutes optimal integration is still unclear. In this mixed methods study protocol we describe how we will investigate three MOOC integration designs using the same MOOC. THIS STUDY HOLDS MULTIPLE

objectives(1) Describe motivation profiles in medical students that learn in integrated MOOCs, and discern if motivation profiles are associated with specific MOOC integration designs; (2) investigate how psychological needs of medical students are satisfied or frustrated in different MOOC integration designs; (3) investigate the relationship between autonomous motivation to learn in an integrated MOOC and use of self-regulated learning skills in that MOOC; (4) uncover processes that are involved in goal acceptance or rejection of medical students in integrated medical MOOC designs with assigned learning goals; and (5) identify obstacles medical students encounter when learning with assigned learning goals in integrated medical MOOCs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Objectives 1 and 2 will be pursued with a cross-sectional study design, objective 3 with an observational cohort study design and objectives 4 and 5 with a qualitative interview study design. All medical students in one of three MOOC integration designs at Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) will be invited to participate. Primary endpoints for objectives 1 and 2 are motivation profiles, and variety in need satisfaction and frustration. For objective 3 the primary endpoints are autonomous motivation and self-regulated online learning. For objectives 4 and 5 primary endpoints are process themes regarding goal acceptance or rejection, and perceived obstacles when working with assigned online learning goals. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Educational Research Review Board of the LUMC. Planned dissemination of findings include three presentations at (inter)national conferences and three research articles.

Indexed as

Education, DistanceEducation, MedicalCross-Sectional StudiesHumansLearningMotivationObservational Studies as Topiceducation & training (see medical education & training)medical education & trainingworld wide web technology

Identifiers

PMID33109653
PMCPMC7592287

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.