Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36540566›Full record

ArticleGMS journal for medical education2022

Ethics education in pediatrics: Implementation and evaluation of an interactive online course for medical students.

André Kidszun, Fiona A Forth, Daniel Matheisl, Franziska Busch, Lara Kaltbeitzel, Sandra Kurz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

André KidszunJohannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, University Medical Center, Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Division of Neonatology, Germany.
Fiona A ForthJohannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, University Medical Center, Institute for the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, DFG-Research Training Group "Life Sciences - Life Writing", Mainz, Germany.
Daniel MatheislMedical Center-University of Freiburg, Center for Pediatrics, Department of Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
Franziska BuschUniversity of Bern, Bern University Hospital, Inselspital, Department of Paediatrics, Division of Neonatology, Bern, Switzerland.
Lara KaltbeitzelJohannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, University Medical Center, Rudolf Frey Lernklinik, Mainz, Germany.
Sandra KurzJohannes Gutenberg-University Mainz, University Medical Center, Rudolf Frey Lernklinik, Mainz, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has catalyzed the development of online learning formats in virtually all areas of medical education. In pediatric ethics, online learning may not only substitute but also offer specific advantages over traditional classroom teaching. Many pediatricians rate their ethics education as poor and medical ethics education lacks evaluation, especially regarding the students' needs. The aim of this project was to implement and evaluate a novel interactive distance learning approach to engage medical students in pediatric ethics education. Methods: An online ethics course was designed and delivered between May and June 2020. Core item of this course was a moderated, written forum discussion spanning several days. Evaluation was mixed methods. We evaluated the effectiveness of the course in terms of quality of the learning environment with a particular focus on relevance to students as well as interactive learning and reflective thinking. The Constructivist On-Line Learning Environment Survey (COLLES) was used to evaluate six different domains of the course. Data are presented as mean (standard deviation [SD]). The respective score range is 1-5, whereby a score of 4 or 5 means that the participants indicated the corresponding item as frequently or almost always present. Results: Responses were available from 104 (78.3%) of the 133 participating students. "Relevance" yielded a score of 4.17 (0.83), "reflective thinking" a score of 4.22 (0.83). "Interactivity" was scored 3.76 (0.99) and "tutor support" 4.72 (0.53). "Peer support" and "interpretation" scored 3.87 (0.98) and 4.49 (0.60), respectively. In qualitative analysis, students particularly valued the structure of the course, the relevance for their professional practice, their active participation and the incentive to reflective thinking. Students also indicated that this was an innovative and exciting format, which fills a current educational gap and should hence be continued beyond the pandemic. Conclusion: In conclusion, students actively engaged in online learning and perceived this ethics course as highly relevant for their professional practice.

Indexed as

COVID-19Students, MedicalChildCurriculumHumansLearningPandemicsdistance-learningeducationinteractivitymedical studentsonlinepediatrics, ethicsreflective thinking

Identifiers

PMID36540566
PMCPMC9733484

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.