ArticleCureus2024
Students' Perception of Online Versus Face-to-Face Learning: What Do the Healthcare Teachers Have to Know?
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of educational intervention on physicians and researchers' knowledge, practices and perceptions towards predatory journals: an interventional study.BMC medical education · 2026Trial
- Impact of a drug allergy education course for non-specialists: Findings from ADAPT-A randomized crossover trial.Allergy · 2025Trial
- Science and Videogames: From Scientific Dissemination to Knowledge Production.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2026Article
- Medical students' perceptions of learning modalities: development and psychometric validation of the e-learning and face-to-face learning experience questionnaire.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Awareness and Confidence in Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Competencies: A Cross-Sectional Study of Postgraduate Trainees in Qatar.The Permanente journal · 2026Article
- Qualitative investigation of academic routines and mental health among medical students following coronavirus vaccination.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a comprehensive tool to study the various elements influencing the utilization of E-learning among undergraduate health professions students.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Impact of Social Media on Patient Expectations and Satisfaction: A Qualitative Exploration in Multan, Pakistan.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, educational institutions confronted the possibility of complete closure and took countermeasures by adapting e-learning platforms. The present cross-sectional study quantified the impact of the pandemic on medical education using a validated and reliable tool. The tool was used to explore the perceptions of 270 healthcare students about e-learning in comparison to traditional learning systems. Inferential statistics were employed using Pearson's chi-squared test. It was found that e-learning was advantageous because of its location flexibility (46.1%) and the ease of access to study materials (46.5%). However, in-person learning was found to lead to an increase in knowledge (44.9%), clinical skills (52.7%), and social competencies (52.7%). The study concluded that while e-learning offers flexibility, traditional face-to-face teaching is deemed more effective for skill development and social interaction. Hence, e-learning should complement rather than replace traditional methods due to limitations in replicating clinical environments.
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.