Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37195746›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2023

Empowering Health Care Education Through Learning Analytics: In-depth Scoping Review.

Iva Bojic, Maleyka Mammadova, Chin-Siang Ang, Wei Lung Teo, Cristina Diordieva, Anita Pienkowska, Dragan Gašević, Josip Car

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

8 authors.

Iva Bojic *Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-4664-3349
Maleyka Mammadova *Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0007-6242-1029
Chin-Siang AngLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0003-1868-7827
Wei Lung TeoLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0009-0009-9084-6248
Cristina DiordievaLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7570-4454
Anita PienkowskaLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-7298-3876
Dragan GaševićDepartment of Human Centred Computing, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9265-1908
Josip CarLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8969-371X

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDigital education has expanded since the COVID-19 pandemic began. A substantial amount of recent data on how students learn has become available for learning analytics (LA). LA denotes the "measurement, collection, analysis, and reporting of data about learners and their contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs."

objectiveThis scoping review aimed to examine the use of LA in health care professions education and propose a framework for the LA life cycle.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive literature search of 10 databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ERIC, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ICTP, Scopus, and IEEE Explore. In total, 6 reviewers worked in pairs and performed title, abstract, and full-text screening. We resolved disagreements on study selection by consensus and discussion with other reviewers. We included papers if they met the following criteria: papers on health care professions education, papers on digital education, and papers that collected LA data from any type of digital education platform.

resultsWe retrieved 1238 papers, of which 65 met the inclusion criteria. From those papers, we extracted some typical characteristics of the LA process and proposed a framework for the LA life cycle, including digital education content creation, data collection, data analytics, and the purposes of LA. Assignment materials were the most popular type of digital education content (47/65, 72%), whereas the most commonly collected data types were the number of connections to the learning materials (53/65, 82%). Descriptive statistics was mostly used in data analytics in 89% (58/65) of studies. Finally, among the purposes for LA, understanding learners' interactions with the digital education platform was cited most often in 86% (56/65) of papers and understanding the relationship between interactions and student performance was cited in 63% (41/65) of papers. Far less common were the purposes of optimizing learning: the provision of at-risk intervention, feedback, and adaptive learning was found in 11, 5, and 3 papers, respectively.

conclusionsWe identified gaps for each of the 4 components of the LA life cycle, with the lack of an iterative approach while designing courses for health care professions being the most prevalent. We identified only 1 instance in which the authors used knowledge from a previous course to improve the next course. Only 2 studies reported that LA was used to detect at-risk students during the course's run, compared with the overwhelming majority of other studies in which data analysis was performed only after the course was completed.

Indexed as

COVID-19PandemicsDelivery of Health CareHumansLearningPower, Psychological21st century abilitiescooperative and collaborative learningCOVID-19datadata science applications in educationdigitaldistance education and web-based learningdistributed learning environmentseducationstudent

Identifiers

PMID37195746
PMCPMC10233437

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.