ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2022
Online Learning for Infectious Disease Fellows-A Needs Assessment.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of the Febrile Podcast and Learning Resource as an Infectious Diseases Education Platform.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Adoption and Utilization of Social Media Among Adult and Pediatric Infectious Diseases Divisions and Fellowship Programs in the United States.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- What's Hot in Transplant Infectious Diseases?Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation SocietyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Online resources and social media have become increasingly ubiquitous in medical education. Little is known about the need for educational resources aimed at infectious disease (ID) fellows. Methods: We conducted an educational needs assessment through a survey that aimed to describe ID fellows' current use of online and social media tools, assess the value of online learning, and identify the educational content preferred by ID fellows. We subsequently convened focus groups with ID fellows to explore how digital tools contribute to fellow learning. Results: A total of 110 ID fellows responded to the survey. Over half were second-year fellows (61, 55%). Although many respondents were satisfied with the educational resources provided by their fellowship program (70, 64%), the majority were interested in an online collaborative educational resource (97, 88%). Twitter was the most popular social media platform for education and the most valued online resource for learning. Focus groups identified several themes regarding social medial learning: broadened community, low barrier to learning, technology-enhanced learning, and limitations of current tools. Overall, the focus groups suggest that fellows value social media and online learning. Conclusions: ID fellows are currently using online and social media resources, which they view as valuable educational tools. Fellowship programs should consider these resources as complementary to traditional teaching and as a means to augment ID fellow education.
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.