Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37874640›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2023

e-Learning Evaluation Framework and Tools for Global Health and Public Health Education: Protocol for a Scoping Review.

Awsan Bahattab, Michel Hanna, George Teo Voicescu, Ives Hubloue, Francesco Della Corte, Luca Ragazzoni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Awsan BahattabCenter for Research and Training in Disaster Medicine, Humanitarian Aid, and Global Health, Novara, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1708-0978
Michel HannaDepartment of Translational Medicine, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3320-9992
George Teo VoicescuCenter for Research and Training in Disaster Medicine, Humanitarian Aid, and Global Health, Novara, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9010-9939
Ives HubloueResearch Group on Emergency and Disaster Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4535-801X
Francesco Della CorteCenter for Research and Training in Disaster Medicine, Humanitarian Aid, and Global Health, Novara, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1736-2318
Luca RagazzoniCenter for Research and Training in Disaster Medicine, Humanitarian Aid, and Global Health, Novara, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2528-4375

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere has been a significant increase in the use of e-learning for global and public health education recently, especially following the COVID-19 pandemic. e-Learning holds the potential to offer equal opportunities, overcoming barriers like physical limitations and training costs. However, its effectiveness remains debated, with institutions unprepared for the sudden shift during the pandemic. To effectively evaluate the outcomes of e-learning, a standardized and rigorous approach is necessary. However, the existing literature on this subject often lacks standardized assessment tools and theoretical foundations, leading to ambiguity in the evaluation process. Consequently, it becomes imperative to identify a clear theoretical foundation and practical approach for evaluating global and public health e-learning outcomes.

objectiveThis protocol for a scoping review aims to map the state of e-learning evaluation in global and public health education to determine the existing theoretical evaluation frameworks, methods, tools, and domains and the gaps in research and practice.

methodsThe scoping review will be conducted following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. The initial search was performed in PubMed, Education Resource Information Center, Web of Science, and Scopus to identify peer-reviewed articles that report on the use of evaluation and assessment for e-learning training. The search strings combined the concepts of e-learning, public health, and health science education, along with evaluation and frameworks. After the initial search, a screening process will be carried out to determine the relevance of the identified studies to the research question. Data related to the characteristics of the included studies, the characteristics of the e-learning technology used in the studies, and the study outcomes will be extracted from the eligible articles. The extracted data will then undergo a structured, descriptive, quantitative, and qualitative content analysis to synthesize the information from the selected studies.

resultsInitial database searches yielded a total of 980 results. Duplicates have been removed, and title and abstract screening of the 805 remaining extracted articles are underway. Quantitative and qualitative findings from the reviewed articles will be presented to answer the study objective.

conclusionsThis scoping review will provide global and public health educators with a comprehensive overview of the current state of e-learning evaluation. By identifying existing e-learning frameworks and tools, the findings will offer valuable guidance for further advancements in global and public health e-learning evaluation. The study will also enable the creation of a comprehensive, evidence-based e-learning evaluation framework and tools, which will improve the quality and accountability of global health and public health education. Ultimately, this will contribute to better health outcomes. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/49955.

Indexed as

computer-assisted instructiondisasterdisaster medicineeducationeducationaleducational assessmente-learningevaluationglobal healthmedical educationpublic healthreview methodologyreview methodsscoping

Identifiers

PMID37874640
PMCPMC10630868

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.