Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35544546›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Use of digital teaching resources and predictors of medical student performance during the pandemic: A prospective study.

Michelle Seer, Charlotte Kampsen, Tim Becker, Sebastian Hobert, Sven Anders, Tobias Raupach

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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

6 authors.

Michelle SeerInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8458-4522
Charlotte KampsenDepartment of Cardiology and Pneumology, Göttingen University Medical Centre, Göttingen, Germany.
Tim BeckerDivision of Medical Education, Göttingen University Medical Centre, Göttingen, Germany.
Sebastian HobertDivision of Application Systems and E-Business, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Sven AndersDepartment of Legal Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Tobias RaupachInstitute of Medical Education, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe coronavirus pandemic has led to increased use of digital teaching formats in medical education. A number of studies have assessed student satisfaction with these resources. However, there is a lack of studies investigating changes in student performance following the switch from contact to virtual teaching. Specifically, there are no studies linking student use of digital resources to learning outcome and examining predictors of failure.

methodsStudent performance before (winter term 2019/20: contact teaching) and during (summer term 2020: no contact teaching) the pandemic was compared prospectively in a cohort of 162 medical students enrolled in the clinical phase of a five-year undergraduate curriculum. Use of and performance in various digital resources (case-based teaching in a modified flipped classroom approach; formative key feature examinations of clinical reasoning; daily multiple choice quizzes) was recorded in summer 2020. Student scores in summative examinations were compared to examination scores in the previous term. Associations between student characteristics, resource use and summative examination results were used to identify predictors of performance.

resultsNot all students made complete use of the digital learning resources provided. Timely completion of tasks was associated with superior performance compared to delayed completion. Female students scored significantly fewer points in formative key feature examinations and digital quizzes. Overall, higher rankings within the student cohort (according to summative exams) in winter term 2019/20 as well as male gender predicted summative exam performance in summer 2020. Scores achieved in the first formative key feature examination predicted summative end-of-module exam scores.

conclusionsThe association between timely completion of tasks as well as early performance in a module and summative exams might help to identify students at risk and offering help early on. The unexpected gender difference requires further study to determine whether the shift to a digital-only curriculum disadvantages female students.

Indexed as

Students, MedicalCurriculumEducational MeasurementFemaleHumansLearningMalePandemicsProspective StudiesTeaching

Identifiers

PMID35544546
PMCPMC9094546

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.