ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2025
Analysis of the impact of a university distance learning course on digitalization in medicine on students and healthcare professionals.
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Systemic Barriers to Curriculum Adaptation for Rapidly Changing Knowledge in Medical Education: Qualitative Study.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe public medical universities in Austria (educating 11,000 students) developed a joint public distance learning series in which clinicians discussed current digital lighthouse projects in their specialty. This study aims to examine the changes in attitude and knowledge of the participants before and after the lecture series to gain insights for future curriculum developments.
methodThe lecture series was announced via various channels at the universities, in health newsletters and in social media. Attitudes toward digitalization in medicine were surveyed before and after the lecture series, together with demographic data. The data were analyzed statistically and descriptively for four groups of interest: female medical students, male medical students, faculty members and members from industry and public agencies.
resultsOut of 351 subjects who attended at least 1 lecture, 117 took part in the survey before and 47 after the lectures. Most participants had a positive attitude towards digitalization (85.3%). They improved their self-assessment of their knowledge from 34.4% to 64.7% (p < 0.05). After the lecture series 55.8% of participants considered digital medical applications to be important or very important today and 68.6% in the future.
conclusionThe study shows that the presentation and discussion of lighthouse projects improves understanding of digitalization in medicine but does not trigger a strong desire for additional further training.
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.