Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35856188›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals2022

A comparison of face-to-face and fully online problem-based learning: Student results and staff experiences, 2014-2020.

Justine E Leavy, Malena Della Bona, Brody Nelson, Francene Leaversuch

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. An e-Problem-Based Learning Program for Infection Control in Nursing Homes: A Quasi-Experimental Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A comparison of face-to-face and fully online problem-based learning: Student results and staff experiences, 2014-2020.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2022
    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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Justine E LeavySchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8747-0424
Malena Della BonaSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4863-6756
Brody NelsonSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9226-8554
Francene LeaversuchSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5983-1111
Curtin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

issue addressedProblem-based learning (PBL) is a student-directed pedagogy that promotes critical thinking, self-directed learning and communication skills essential for health promotion students and practitioners. This paper reports on student results, student evaluation and staff experience of PBL in the face-to-face and fully online environment in an undergraduate health sciences unit in an Australian university.

methodsA single time-point study using quantitative and qualitative administrative student data (2014-2020) and narrative reflection from teaching academics (n = 5) was undertaken. Descriptive, independent t test and bivariate analyses for student results data were conducted; an inductive approach was used to analyse qualitative data and create codes.

resultsStudent sample (n = 472) consisted face-to-face (n = 358, 75.8%) and online (n = 114, 24.2%) enrolments. Final Unit Mark was significantly higher for fully online students compared with face-to-face students in 2018 (P = .007) and 2019 (P = .001). Final Unit Achievement was significantly higher for fully online students compared with face-to-face students in 2018 (P = .017) and 2019 (P = .043). Three themes emerged: The PBL approach; Evolution of PBLs; Student skills and competencies. DISCUSSION: PBL allows students to learn through facilitated problem solving and strong collaborative skills. The face-to-face and fully online PBLs improved the student and academic staff experience, while supporting the development of critical thinking and self-directed research. Further, it supported students to develop their core health promotion competencies; and enhanced the online student learning experience. SO WHAT?: Vital for contemporary, global graduates, the fully online PBL approach allows students to build critical academic and professional skills utilising current information technology relevant for collaborative professional practice.

Indexed as

Problem-Based LearningThinkingAustraliaHumansStudentscommunication skillscompetenciesfully onlineproblem-based learningtechnology

Identifiers

PMID35856188
PMCPMC9796957
OpenAlexW4285987900

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.