Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36969628›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in public health2023

Blended learning in physical education: A systematic review.

Chen Wang, Roxana Dev Omar Dev, Kim Geok Soh, Nasnoor Juzaily Mohd Nasirudddin, Yubin Yuan, Xueyan Ji

Full text readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Effects of Pilates on Body Posture: A Systematic Review.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chen WangDepartment of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Serdang, Malaysia.
Roxana Dev Omar DevDepartment of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Serdang, Malaysia.
Kim Geok SohDepartment of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Serdang, Malaysia.
Nasnoor Juzaily Mohd NasirudddinDepartment of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Serdang, Malaysia.
Yubin YuanDepartment of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Serdang, Malaysia.
Xueyan JiDepartment of Sports Studies, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Selangor, Serdang, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review aims to provide a detailed overview of the current status and development trends of blended learning in physical education by reviewing journal articles from the Web of Science (WOS) database. Several dimensions of blended learning were observed, including research trends, participants, online learning tools, theoretical frameworks, evaluation methods, application domains, Research Topics, and challenges. Following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), a total of 22 journal articles were included in the current review. The findings of this review reveal that the number of blended learning articles in physical education has increased since 2018, proving that the incorporation of online learning tools into physical education courses has grown in popularity. From the reviewed journal articles, most attention is given to undergraduates, emphasizing that attention in the future should be placed on K-12 students, teachers, and educational institutions. The theoretical framework applied by journal articles is also limited to a few articles and the assessment method is relatively homogeneous, consisting mostly of questionnaires. This review also discovers the trends in blended learning in physical education as most of the studies focus on the topic centered on dynamic physical education. In terms of Research Topics, most journal articles focus on perceptions, learning outcomes, satisfaction, and motivation, which are preliminary aspects of blended learning research. Although the benefits of blended learning are evident, this review identifies five challenges of blended learning: instructional design challenges, technological literacy and competency challenges, self-regulation challenges, alienation and isolation challenges, and belief challenges. Finally, a number of recommendations for future research are presented.

Indexed as

LearningPhysical Education and TrainingHumansStudentsblended learningeducational technologylearning strategiesphysical educationsports

Identifiers

PMID36969628
PMCPMC10034186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read1
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.