Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33915035›Full record

ArticleAnatomical sciences education2021

An Adaptive Blended Learning Model for the Implementation of an Integrated Medical Neuroscience Course During the Covid-19 Pandemic.

Thomas I Nathaniel, Richard L Goodwin, Lauren Fowler, Brooks McPhail, Asa C Black

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anatomical sciences education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Evaluating a Photogrammetry-Based Video for Undergraduate Anatomy Education.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors.

Thomas I NathanielDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine Greenville, University of South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0954-5050
Richard L GoodwinDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine Greenville, University of South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina.
Lauren FowlerDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine Greenville, University of South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina.
Brooks McPhailDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine Greenville, University of South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina.
Asa C BlackDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, School of Medicine Greenville, University of South Carolina, Greenville, South Carolina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The implementation of an integrated medical neuroscience course by technologically pivoting an in-person neuroscience course to online using an adaptive blended method may provide a unique approach for teaching a medical neuroscience course during the Covid-19 pandemic. An adaptive blended learning method was developed in response to the requirements necessitated by the Covid-19 pandemic. This model combined pedagogical needs with digital technology using online learning activities to implement student learning in a medical neuroscience course for year one medical students. This approach provided medical students with an individually customized learning opportunity in medical neuroscience. The students had the complete choice to engage the learning system synchronously or asynchronously and learn neuroscience materials at different locations and times in response to the demands required to deal with the pandemic. Students' performance in summative and formative examinations of the adaptive blended learning activities were compared with the previous performance obtained the previous year when the contents of the medical neuroscience course were implemented using the conventional "face-to-face" learning approach. While the cohort of our students in 2019 and 2020 changed, the contents, sessions, volume of material, and assessment were constant. This enabled us to compare the results of the 2019 and 2020 classes. Overall, students' performance was not significantly different between the adaptive blended learning and the in-person approach. More students scored between 70% and 79% during the adaptive blended learning compared with in-class teaching, while more students scored between 80% and 89% during the in-person learning than during the adaptive blended learning. Finally, the percentage of students that scored >90% was not significantly different for both Years 2019 and 2020. The adaptive blended learning approach was effective in enhancing academic performance for high-performing medical students. It also permitted the early identification of underachieving students, thereby serving as an early warning sign to permit timely intervention.

Indexed as

AnatomyCOVID-19Students, MedicalCurriculumHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2adaptive blended learningbrick-and-mortarCovid-19face-to-face learningintegrationmedical educationneuroanatomy educationneuroscience educationpedagogy

Identifiers

PMID33915035
PMCPMC8239699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.