ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2022
Perceptions of Digital Teaching During COVID-19; A National Survey of 359 Internal Medicine Trainees.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 2022. 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.
- Large-scale virtual dermatology teaching for internal medical trainees across the UK.Future healthcare journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The Covid-19 pandemic brought significant disruption to post-graduate medical education. Lecture-based training days were rapidly converted to webinars. This study aims to assess the perceptions of digital training in internal medical trainees. Methods: IMTs (internal medicine trainees) nationally were surveyed on their perceptions of digital training, ease of access, engagement, and interactivity via a 10-item questionnaire. A mixed-method approach using qualitative and quantitative questions was used. Likert scales were analysed using a mean result of above 3 to indicate agreement. Results: 359 trainees responded. Trainees agreed that they preferred digital training to face-to-face teaching (mean 3.68); digital training was more engaging (mean 4.25), easier to access (mean 4.49), and as effective for learning as face-to-face teaching (mean 4.69). The most reported advantages were no travel (89%) and the ability to watch later on (88%). 63% of trainees reported loss of social interaction as a disadvantage. Discussion: This survey suggests that digital teaching has a potential role in IMT training beyond the pandemic.
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.