ArticleBMJ open2021
Webinar-based continuing medical education in otorhinolaryngology during the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany: a longitudinal study.
Article in BMJ open, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Educational Impact of Worldwide Webinar on Management of Myopia Progression in Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- [Webinars for ENT specialists in Germany during the Lockdown phase of the COVID-19 pandemic 2020/2021].Laryngo- rhino- otologie · 2023Article
- Barriers and facilitators to the uptake of the Concussion Awareness Training Tool as continuing medical education in primary care.Concussion (London, England) · 2023Article
- The Educational Impact of Web-Based, Faculty-Led Continuing Medical Education Programs in Type 2 Diabetes: A Survey Study to Analyze Changes in Knowledge, Competence, and Performance of Health Care Professionals.JMIR medical education · 2022Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveReliance on webinars for continuing medical education (CME) has increased since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we aimed to evaluate the teaching methods used in these webinars.
designRetrospective, longitudinal study.
setting20 CME-approved webinars, conducted March-December 2020 in Germany, and lasting 2.25 hours each.
participantsOtorhinolaryngologists pursuing CME credits.
interventionsPostwebinar participant assessments of the speaker, effects on practical work, desired scientific content, technical quality, interactions, attention and future training behaviour.
resultsOn average, 780 participants joined each webinar. The mean survey response rate was 35% (n=282). When asked how well the speaker had mastered the content, 38% responded 'very well', 44% responded 'well', 14% indicated 'satisfactory' and 4% chose 'sufficient'. The frequency of webinars was considered appropriate by 92%, too high by 4% and too low by 4% of participants. The measured attention of the participants was 90%. After the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown, 68% of participants preferred online teaching. The average costs per participant were €3.50 (about $4.25 or £3.15) per webinar.
conclusionsAlthough the pandemic context likely influenced the results, we conclude that periodic ear, nose and throat webinar training during COVID-19 in 2020 was an effective alternative delivery method. We found high attention rates, high levels of participant satisfaction and low costs. Evaluations and re-evaluations will be necessary to adapt teaching concepts successfully and ensure high levels of teaching and learning efficiency.
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.