ArticleClinical and experimental dermatology2021
Slack as a virtual undergraduate dermatology community: a pilot study.
Article in Clinical and experimental dermatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of an Interdisciplinary Educational Intervention on Healthcare Provider Knowledge and Beliefs Regarding Opioid Harm Reduction in Older Adults: A Pre-Post Survey Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- When is "convenient time" for residents?: a trial of Resident Study Log as asynchronous learning tool for residents.Medical education online · 2025Article
- Strategies for Digital Clinical Teaching During the COVID Pandemic: A Scoping Review.Medical science educator · 2024Article
- E-Learning Performance Evaluation in Medical Education-A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDermatology is under-represented in UK undergraduate curricula, and with a diagnostic and educational toolkit that is heavily centred on face-to-face (F2F) clinical examination, dermatology education has been disproportionately affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Online channel-based messaging apps such as Slack offer an opportunity to engage students in remote, multimodal collaborative learning by reproducing a classroom environment in the virtual space.
aimTo determine the feasibility, acceptability and proof of concept for an online Slack community in undergraduate dermatology education.
methodsUndergraduate medical students participated in an online classroom for a 6-week programme encompassing case-based discussions, seminars and journal clubs. The platform was facilitated by junior doctors (n = 10) and patient educators (n = 6). Students and faculty completed a post-course evaluation. Students additionally completed a pre- and post-intervention dermatology quiz. Mixed methods analyses included quantitative analyses to explore data trends and qualitative phenomenographic analyses to assimilate key underlying themes.
resultsStudents (n = 65) were enrolled to join the platform. The evaluation was completed by students (n = 52) from UK universities (n = 27). The majority of students (n = 27) interacted with the platform as passive observers (≤ 5 active interactions with the channel), with a small group (n = 4) of 'super-users' (≥ 100 active interactions). The overall quality of the course was described as 'excellent' by 96% of participants and 100% of faculty.
conclusionA community-based online classroom can act as an enjoyable, acceptable and collaborative means of delivering dermatology education to undergraduate medical students. Its ease of use and supportive nature may also facilitate patient involvement. Such advances may provide vital safeguards against the reduction in F2F learning that has accompanied the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.