Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35107417›Full record

ArticleMedical education online2022

Medical students' adoption and evaluation of a completely digital general practice clerkship - cross-sectional survey and cohort comparison with face-to-face teaching.

Marina Fehl, Vera Gehres, Anne-Kathrin Geier, Thomas Mundt, Kay Klinge, Thomas Frese, Markus Bleckwenn, Tobias Deutsch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education online, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Marina FehlDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7158-300X
Vera GehresDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Anne-Kathrin GeierDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Thomas MundtDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Kay KlingeDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Thomas FreseInstitute of General Practice and Family Medicine, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle/Saale, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-9745-5690
Markus BleckwennDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Tobias DeutschDepartment of General Practice, Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, the University of Leipzig completely switched to online teaching. Thus, we developed a practice-oriented digital substitute for a two-week mandatory general practice (GP) clerkship. Main components were processing of clinical cases and additional GP topics, visual diagnoses, information and examination videos, and regular remote exchanges with associated GP teachers. We took the chance to comprehensively evaluate the new teaching formats (acceptance, use, working enjoyment, learning gain, practical relevance, insights into general practice) and to compare evaluations with two previous semesters to gain insights for future blended learning concepts.

methodsCross-sectional post-hoc online evaluation among fourth year (of six) medical students participating in the digital mandatory 2-week GP clerkship during summer semester 2020; additional cohort comparison with two previous semesters (face-to-face clerkship).

resultsOut of 192 participants in the digital clerkship, 99 completed our questionnaire (response rate = 51.6%). Results were compared with 277 previous evaluations (face-to-face semesters). Most participants reported having enjoyed the online-based clerkship (87.9%), having learned a lot (89.9%), having gained insights into general practice (76.8%), and perceived high practical relevance (90.9%). Implementing the new teaching formats into future face-to-face clerkships was welcomed by 65.6%. Clinical cases, visual diagnoses, examination videos and communication with GP teachers were rated best regarding working enjoyment, learning gain, practical relevance and insights into a GP's work. Cohort comparison revealed somewhat better evaluations regarding knowledge transfer for the digital clerkship while imparting of skills and attitudes was reportedly worse.

conclusionsStudents welcomed the digital content and perceived relevant learning gain. Our results may help to develop future blended learning concepts. Clinical cases, examination videos and visual diagnoses appear to be particularly suitable as useful online complements which could enrich face-to-face teaching. As students especially valued the exclusive time for exchanges with their preceptor, this should be facilitated in face-to-face clerkships.

Indexed as

COVID-19General PracticeStudents, MedicalCross-Sectional StudiesHumansPandemicsSARS-CoV-2blended learningclerkshipgeneral practiceonline teachingUndergraduate medical education

Identifiers

PMID35107417
PMCPMC8812779

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.