ArticleBMC health services research2024
Learning experiences from an online QI fellowship programme during COVID-19 - a qualitative study.
Article in BMC health services 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom, multiple aspects of everyday human existence were disrupted. In contrast, almost all levels of educational learning continued, albeit with modifications, including adaptation to virtual-or online-classroom experiences. This pedagogic transition also occurred in the National Institute of Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration Northwest London's (NIHR ARC NWL) Improvement Leader Fellowship, an annual programme focusing on quality improvement (QI). This qualitative study aimed to understand how these changes impacted the Fellows' learning experience.
methodsWe explored the experiences of two cohorts of programme Fellows (n = 18, 2020-2021 and n = 15, 2021-2022) with focus groups, analysed under a constructivist qualitative research paradigm.
resultsThe two primary and four sub-themes that emerged were: Online QI learning experience (benefits and challenges) and Implementing online QI learning (facilitators and barriers). While benefits had three further sub-themes (i.e., digital flexibility, connection between learners, and respite from impact of COVID-19), challenges had four (i.e., lack of interaction, technological challenges and digital exclusion, human dimension, and digital fatigue). While the facilitators had three sub-themes (i.e., mutual and programmatic support, online resource access, and personal resilience), barriers had one (i.e., preventing implementation and lack of protected time).
conclusionDespite challenges to in-person ways of working, online learning generally worked for action-orientated QI learning, but changes are needed to ensure the effectiveness of future use of virtual learning for QI. Understanding the challenges of the translation of learning into action is crucial for implementation learning, gaining insight into how improvement Fellows navigated this translation when learning remotely and implementing directly in their workplace is key to understanding the evolving nature of implementation over the pandemic years and beyond.
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.