Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37444754›Full record

ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Lessons for Medical and Health Education Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Zhanna Gardanova, Olga Belaia, Svetlana Zuevskaya, Klavdiya Turkadze, Wadim Strielkowski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Zhanna GardanovaDepartment of Psychotherapy, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University, Ostrovitianov Str. 1, Moscow 117997, Russia.
Olga BelaiaDepartment of Infectious Diseases, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Trubetskaya Str. 8/2, Moscow 119991, Russia.
Svetlana ZuevskayaDepartment of Infectious Diseases, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Trubetskaya Str. 8/2, Moscow 119991, Russia.
Klavdiya TurkadzeDepartment of Infectious Diseases, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University), Trubetskaya Str. 8/2, Moscow 119991, Russia.
Wadim StrielkowskiDepartment of Trade and Finance, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, Prague 6, 165 00 Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0001-6113-3841
Sechenov University · RUCzech University of Life Sciences Prague · CZPirogov Russian National Research Medical University · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our paper analyzes lessons for medical education and health education stemming from the experience gained in the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, it tackles the issue of the social health and psychological wellbeing of medical students involved in online education during the COVID-19 pandemic. The paper systematizes up-to-date data on how medical schools and universities have adapted to the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic and implemented novel effective solutions for the learning process, such as transitioning from traditional in-person classes to online learning, incorporating virtual simulations and telemedicine experiences for clinical training, and collaborating with health authorities to provide support in testing and contact tracing efforts. The paper contains an analysis of various aspects of medical education, such as the changes in practical classes, the impact of the pandemic on the formation of communication skills, methods for assessing students' knowledge and skills, and many others. It also considers case studies related to the implementation of educational programs, methodologies, and novel digital technologies in a pandemic. Additionally, the paper features an empirical study that is based on the results of our own survey that was carried out with the help of a snowball convenient sampling that involved 710 medical students between 19 and 25 years of age (56% females and 44% males) from 4 Russian regions (Moscow, Krasnodar, Kazan, and Saint Petersburg). We applied the correlation between stress scores, anxiety scores, factors of stress, and strategies for coping with stress and various economic and demographic variables (age, environment, and gender) that were analyzed using the chi-square test. Our results demonstrate that over 85% of the students in our sample yielded an above-average vulnerability to stress due to the COVID-19 restrictions. At the same time, around 61% of the students experienced severe anxiety during online education in the COVID-19 pandemic. The important factors leading to stress and anxiety were the fear of getting infected and social distancing, and the best strategy to deal with stress and increase wellbeing was self-control. Through a comprehensive review of the literature and empirical estimations, our paper identifies key areas of improvement, including curriculum adaptation, technology integration, faculty development, student support, and interprofessional collaboration. The proposed recommendations aim at strengthening medical education systems and preparing healthcare professionals to effectively navigate future pandemics.

Indexed as

anxietyCOVID-19 pandemicdigital technologieshealth educationmedical educationwellbeing

Identifiers

PMID37444754
PMCPMC10340380
OpenAlexW4383068438

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.