ArticleJMIR formative research2024
Comparison of Blended Learning With Traditional Dermatology Learning for Medical Students: Prospective Evaluation Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNovel internet-based applications and associated technologies have influenced all aspects of society, ranging from commerce and business to entertainment and health care, and education is no exception. In this context, this study was designed to evaluate the impact of a dermatology e-learning program on the academic performance of medical students in dermatology.
objectiveThe aim of this study is to develop a dermatology blended-learning course for undergraduate medical students, evaluate the knowledge gained by students exposed to this course, and compare the results to those of traditional teaching methods.
methodsIn this prospective study, we evaluated the performance of fourth-semester medical students at the Federal University of Bahia, Brazil. Students who had been in their second year of the medical course in 2019 were considered the control group, while students in their second year in 2020 were considered the blended or hybrid group. The first group attended traditional classes, using printed material (books and handouts), while the second group used our web-based course and e-book as a supplement in a hybrid web-plus-traditional fashion. Neither participants nor evaluators were blinded. The students in both groups were subjected to the same pre- and postcourse face-to-face, multiple-choice, paper-based evaluations, and we compared their performances. The content of the classes was the same for both groups. All didactic activities were developed by a team of certified dermatologists and professors from the university.
resultsA total of 129 students were selected and divided into 2 groups: the control group (n=57) and the hybrid group (n=72). The precourse tests did not indicate any difference between the control group (mean score 2.74, SD 1.25) and the hybrid group (mean score 3.2, SD 1.22 SD; P>.05). The hybrid group had better final-term grades (mean 8.18, SD 1.26) than the traditional group (mean 7.11, SD 1.04). This difference was statistically significant (P<.05).
conclusionsThis study explores pedagogical possibilities in the field of dermatology teaching for medical school students. The results suggest that the performance of undergraduate students who attended the course with additional e-learning material was superior when compared to the performance of those who participated in the traditional course alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.