Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33441140›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2021

Digital learning designs in physiotherapy education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nina Bjerketveit Ødegaard, Hilde Tinderholt Myrhaug, Tone Dahl-Michelsen, Yngve Røe

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05863650 (The Effect of Digital-Based Simulation Education on Self-Efficacy and Clinical Reasoning Skills in Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Students), which is not on this map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT05863650 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Digital-Based Simulation Education on Self-Efficacy and Clinical Reasoning Skills in Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation Students

TypeinterventionalSponsorMarmara UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled60ConditionsSelf-efficacy, Clinical ReasoningArmsDigital based simulation, Face to face education
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  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

4 authors.

Nina Bjerketveit ØdegaardDepartment of Physiotherapy, Oslo Metropolitan University, Post Box 4. St. Olavsplass, 0130, Oslo, Norway. ninabjer@oslomet.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6169-1050
Hilde Tinderholt MyrhaugDepartment of Nursing and Health Promotion, Oslo Metropolitan University, Post Box 4. St. Olavsplass, 0130, Oslo, Norway.
Tone Dahl-MichelsenDepartment of Physiotherapy, Oslo Metropolitan University, Post Box 4. St. Olavsplass, 0130, Oslo, Norway.
Yngve RøeDepartment of Physiotherapy, Oslo Metropolitan University, Post Box 4. St. Olavsplass, 0130, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital learning designs have the potential to support teaching and learning within higher education. However, the research on digital learning designs within physiotherapy education is limited. This study aims to identify and investigate the effectiveness of digital learning designs in physiotherapy education.

methodsThe study was designed as a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized trials. A search of eight databases on digital learning designs and technology was conducted. Study selection, methodology and quality assessment were performed independently by three reviewers. The included studies were mapped according to the types of digital interventions and studies. For similar interventions, the learning effects were calculated using meta-analyses.

resultsAltogether, 22 studies were included in the review (17 randomized controlled trials and five cohort studies). A blended learning design was used in 21 studies, a flipped classroom model in five and a distance learning design in one. Altogether, 10 of the 22 articles were included in meta-analyses, which showed statistically significant effects for flipped classrooms on knowledge acquisition (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.41; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20, 0.62), for interactive websites or applications (apps) on practical skills (SMD: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.71,1.43) and for students self-produced videos on a practical skill in a cervical spine scenario (SMD: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.93). Overall, the effects indicated that blended learning designs are equally as or more effective than traditional classroom teaching to achieve learning outcomes. Distance learning showed no significant differences compared to traditional classroom teaching.

conclusionsThe current findings from physiotherapy education indicate that digital learning designs in the form of blended learning and distance learning were equally or more effective compared to traditional teaching. The meta-analyses revealed significant effects on student learning in favour of the interventions using flipped classrooms, interactive websites/apps and students self-produced videos. However, these results must be confirmed in larger controlled trials. Further, research should investigate how digital learning designs can facilitate students' learning of practical skills and behaviour, learning retention and approaches to studying as well as references for teaching and learning in digital learning environments.

Indexed as

Education, DistanceLearningHumansPhysical Therapy ModalitiesStudentsDigital learning designsDigital learning technologyLearning outcomesMeta-analysisPhysiotherapy educationSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID33441140
PMCPMC7805166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.