ArticleBMC medical education2021
It's what you do, not the way you do it - online versus face-to-face small group teaching in first year medical school.
Article in BMC medical education, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Non-Face-to-Face Teaching with Passive Training on Personal Protective Equipment Use in Health Science Students: A Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Trial
- Evaluation of class participation in non-face-to-face CPR training for medical students.PloS one · 2022Trial
- Comparing the effectiveness of online and onsite training for simulation facilitator: a quasi-experiment.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Blending Online and In-Person Seminars to Strengthen Clinical Placement Learning in Physiotherapy Education.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
- Leveraging Digital Platforms: An Eight-Webinar Teaching Series to Enhance Organised Learning in Orthopaedic Surgery.Cureus · 2024Article
- Transitioning from face-to-face to distance education. Part 2: A qualitative study in the former Yugoslavia during COVID-19.The European journal of general practice · 2023Article
- An online case-based teaching and assessment program on clinical history-taking skills and reasoning using simulated patients in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.BMC medical education · 2023Article
- Virtual reality against Zoom fatigue? A field study on the teaching and learning experience in interactive video and VR conferencing.GMS journal for medical education · 2023Article
- Medical student exam performance and perceptions of a COVID-19 pandemic-appropriate pre-clerkship medical physiology and pathophysiology curriculum.BMC medical education · 2022Observational
- Perceived usefulness of open educational resources: Impact of switching to online learning for face-to-face and distance learners.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Unveiling Paradigms: Exploring the Evolving Student-teacher Dynamics in Medical Education.Indian journal of community medicine : official publication of Indian Association of Preventive & Social MedicineArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMajor disruptions imposed on medical education by the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid shift to online teaching in medical programs, necessitated need for evaluation of this format. In this study we directly compared knowledge outcomes, social outcomes, and wellbeing of first year student small group teaching in either face to face (f2f) or online format.
methodsAt the end of the first course of our medical program, students were invited to participate in an online questionnaire with 10 quantitative items and 1 qualitative item. These were analysed using Factor Analysis Pattern Matrix and linear regression to group items and assess relatedness. Qualitative responses were thematized using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA). Summative assessment results were compared, both between current cohorts to historical cohorts.
resultsFrom a cohort of 298 students there was a 77% response rate. Overall, there were no differences in knowledge gains, either between groups or when compared to historical cohorts. Questionnaire items fell reliably into groups that related to either learning outcomes, social outcomes, or wellbeing. Independent T tests showed that format for teaching (online versus f2f) had an impact on social outcomes but no direct impact on learning outcomes. Linear regression revealed that the social outcomes have a direct impact on wellbeing and almost the double the impact on learning outcomes than mode of learning i.e.. F2f or online (β = .448 and β = .232 respectively).
conclusionIn this study, we were able to show with statistical strength that social outcomes for students such as engaging with peers and facilitator, contributing to the group, and making friends have a direct impact on wellbeing and indirectly impact learning outcomes (such as motivation, satisfaction, integration of knowledge). In a rapidly changing educational landscape, in our opinion, it is vital that these aspects are a focus of design and delivery of medical education. The data from this study supports the notion that activity design and the expertise of the teacher in facilitating the small group activities, has greater impact than the mode of educational delivery itself on students' learning processes.
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.