ArticleFlorence Nightingale journal of nursing2021
Evaluation of Online Education Provided to Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A University Experience.
Article in Florence Nightingale journal of nursing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Effects of Individualized Information and Emotional Support Education on Midwifery Students' Anxiety during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimIn this study, it was aimed to evaluate the online education provided to students during the COVID-19 pandemic.
methodThe research was carried out with 841 students studying for undergraduate and associate degrees in a health sciences university. The research was designed with qualitative and quantitative features using a mixed method. In the quantitative phase, an online questionnaire consisting of eight questions covering socio-demographic data and experiences in the COVID-19 process was used. In the qualitative phase, in-depth interviews were conducted online using a semi-structured interview form. The qualitative design was carried out and reported in accordance with the criteria of "COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ)."
resultsOf the students who responded, 75.5% (n = 635) stated that they attended 76-100% of the total number of courses, and 56.1% of them stated that the efficiency of their lessons was over 50%. The analysis of the data was done manually according to Heidegger philosophy, in accordance with the steps of the data analysis method of Colaizzi (1978). As a result of the content analysis, three main themes and 21 categories were determined. The following themes were achieved: "Better than nothing!" for positive aspects of students' experiences, "Face-to-face education is better!" for negative aspects, and "It could have been better!" for their suggestions.
conclusionIt has been determined that the contents of distance education in health sciences for theoretical and applied courses should be further developed with a technological approach.
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.