Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36618795›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022

A comparative study about attitudes towards the efficiency, effectiveness, and atmosphere of offline and online learning among medical students.

Zhiqiao Jiao, Yongjie Yang, Shuai Zhang, Jing Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Zhiqiao JiaoSchool of Education, China Conservatory of Music, Beijing, China.
Yongjie YangQingdao University Medical College, Qingdao, China.
Shuai ZhangSchool of Education, China Conservatory of Music, Beijing, China.
Jing XuAffiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In recent decades, the mode of education has changed, and online learning via the Internet has gradually entered the medical education system. During the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, online learning rapidly became one of the main learning methods for medical students, this has impacted medical undergraduates and postgraduates to varying degrees; however, currently, little is known about its effectiveness as a learning mode. Methods: This study included undergraduates and postgraduates in medical schools at some universities in China. The student participants were asked to complete a questionnaire survey in which they self-evaluated the learning effectiveness, learning efficiency, learning atmosphere, and other issues associated with online and offline learning. SPSSAU was used to analyze the acquired data. Results: Most medical students expressed the view that offline learning was superior to online learning in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, and atmosphere. However, online learning was better in terms of the acquisition of learning resources and flexibility. The attitudes of medical undergraduates and postgraduates participating in this research were largely similar (P>0.05); however, undergraduates placed a higher value on offline learning than postgraduates (P<0.05). Conclusions: Both online and offline learning have advantages and disadvantages. The differences between undergraduates and postgraduates may be related to subtle differences in the training objectives at these 2 levels of medical education. Combining the advantages of online and offline learning may improve the learning of medical students.

Indexed as

learning effectmedical postgraduatemedical undergraduateoffline learningOnline learning

Identifiers

PMID36618795
PMCPMC9816847

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.