Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34469484›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2021

Effectiveness of blended learning in pharmacy education: An experimental study using clinical research modules.

Athira Balakrishnan, Sreedharan Nair, Vijayanarayana Kunhikatta, Muhammed Rashid, M K Unnikrishnan, P S Jagannatha, Viji P Chandran, Kanav Khera, Girish Thunga

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2021. 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. Trial
  2. Trial
  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

9 authors.

Athira BalakrishnanDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Sreedharan NairDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Vijayanarayana KunhikattaDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Muhammed RashidDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
M K UnnikrishnanDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, National College of Pharmacy, Kozhikode, Kerala, India.
P S JagannathaStatistician, Bangalore, India.
Viji P ChandranDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Kanav KheraDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
Girish ThungaDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Manipal College of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.ORCID 0000-0003-1257-969X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

objectivesThough there are studies to evaluate the effectiveness of blended learning in pharmacy education, most of them originate from USA and have used previous year students' scores as control. Also there is less research in comparing use of self -regulated learning strategies between blended and other learning strategies. Primary aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of blended learning on knowledge score using clinical research modules. Secondary objective was designed to compare the use of self-regulated learning strategies between blended learning, web-based e-learning and didactic teaching. MATERIALS AND

methodsA prospective cluster randomized trial was conducted with didactic teaching as control and web-based e-learning and blended learning as interventions. The target population was final year Pharm D students. Outcome was assessed using a validated knowledge questionnaire, a motivated strategies for learning questionnaire and a feedback form. All statistical analyses were carried out using Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) Version 20.

resultsA total of 241 students from 12 colleges completed the study. Mean knowledge score of students in blended learning group was higher than those in the didactic teaching and web- based e- learning program (64.26±18.19 Vs 56.65±8.73 Vs 52.11±22.06,p<0.001).Frequency of use of learning strategies namely rehearsal, elaboration, organization and critical thinking was statistically significantly higher in the blended learning group compared to those of didactic and web-based e-learning group (p<0.05) But there were no statistically significant difference of motivational orientations between didactic and blended learning group except strategies of extrinsic goal orientation and self-efficacy. Students preferred blended learning (86.5%) over didactic and web-based e-learning.

conclusionBlended learning approach is an effective way to teach clinical research module. Students of blended learning group employed all motivational and learning strategies more often than students of the didactic and web- based e-learning groups except strategies of intrinsic goal orientation, task value, control of learning belief and help seeking.

Indexed as

Self EfficacyClinical CompetenceComputer-Assisted InstructionEducation, PharmacyFemaleHumansMaleProgram EvaluationProspective StudiesStudents, PharmacyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34469484
PMCPMC8409684

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.