Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33557724›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2021

Interdisciplinary groups perform better than intradisciplinary groups in online group discussion activities.

Taro Yamashita, Shuji Osawa, Kunio Ota, Takahiro Minami, Yuma Morisaki, Yutaro Takahashi, Tomoya Itatani, Satoshi Hara, Toshikatsu Tamai, Makoto Fujiu and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors.

Taro YamashitaDepartment of General Medicine, Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa, Japan.
Shuji OsawaDivision of Environmental Engineering Design, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology , Kanazawa, Japan.
Kunio OtaMedical Education Research Center, Graduate School of Medical Sciences , Kanazawa, Japan.
Takahiro MinamiDivision of Environmental Engineering Design, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology , Kanazawa, Japan.
Yuma MorisakiDivision of Environmental Engineering Design, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology , Kanazawa, Japan.
Yutaro TakahashiDivision of Health Sciences, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Science, Kanazawa University , Kanazawa, Japan.
Tomoya ItataniDivision of Health Sciences, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Science, Kanazawa University , Kanazawa, Japan.
Satoshi HaraMedical Education Research Center, Graduate School of Medical Sciences , Kanazawa, Japan.
Toshikatsu TamaiMedical Education Research Center, Graduate School of Medical Sciences , Kanazawa, Japan.
Makoto FujiuDivision of Environmental Engineering Design, Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology , Kanazawa, Japan.
Hideki NomuraDepartment of General Medicine, Kanazawa University Hospital , Kanazawa, Japan.
Rie OkamotoDivision of Health Sciences, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Science, Kanazawa University , Kanazawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Online classes have been provided for health-care pre-licensure learners during the novel coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of online group work in interprofessional education. A total of 209 students were assigned to 50 groups (18 medical student groups, 13 nursing student groups, and 19 mixed medical/nursing student groups). Learners performed group work during the orientation for the course, which was hosted using an online video conferencing system. The learners first performed the activity individually (10 min) and then engaged in a group discussion to reach consensus on their answers (30 min). We calculated the scores before and after the group discussion and shared the results with the students. Scores were improved after the group discussion (mean ± SEM, 23.7 ± 0.9) compared with before (37.3 ± 1.3) (P < .0001). Lower scores after the group discussion, which indicated the effect of the group discussion on making better decisions, were observed most in the mixed medical/nursing student groups, followed by the nursing student and medical student groups. We noted only 3 groups in which the group discussion showed a negative effect on decision-making: all 3 of these groups were mixed (3 of 19 groups; 16%). These data demonstrated the power of group discussion for solving tasks when the participants' professional fields were mixed. However, the small size of the interdisciplinary groups might have resulted in less effective discussion, which might be due in part to psychological barriers arising from professional differences. Online group work is effective for facilitating discussion and building consensus about decisions in interprofessional education for medical and nursing students. Potential psychological barriers may exist in about 16% of mixed group students at the start, which should be kept in mind by instructors.

Indexed as

Interdisciplinary StudiesInterprofessional RelationsAdultCOVID-19Education, DistanceFemaleGroup ProcessesHumansLearningMaleSARS-CoV-2Students, MedicalStudents, Nursingdecision makingInterprofessional educationonline group workprofessional hierarchyundergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID33557724
PMCPMC8676687

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.