ArticleBMC medical education2025
Evaluating the digital transformation in health sciences education: a thematic analysis of higher education teachers' perspectives.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- AI-Empowered Nuclear Medicine Education, Part 2: Practical AI Applications for Educators.Journal of nuclear medicine technology · 2026Article
- Metaverse-based objective structured clinical examinations: an exploratory approach to advancing clinical competency assessment.Korean journal of medical education · 2026Article
- Pharmacy students' use of e-learning resources: a repeated cross-sectional study in 2021 and 2026.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Blended and digital approaches in histology and pathology teaching: A scoping review.Anatomical sciences education · 2026Article
- Academics' and clinicians' perspectives on telehealth integration in Saudi rehabilitation education.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Perceptions of Chinese higher-vocational nursing program directors on digital transformation: A qualitative study.PloS one · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rapid shift to digital-based education has profoundly influenced pedagogical approaches in health sciences higher education. This transformation has prompted a critical re-evaluation of digital pedagogy to improve learning effectiveness and adapt to emerging educational realities. This study explored the perspectives of health sciences teachers on digital pedagogy in higher education, with a specific focus on their adaptation to and perception of integrating digital technologies in pedagogical processes. A qualitative research design utilizing thematic analysis was employed. The study involved twenty health sciences teachers in higher education institutions through four focus group sessions. Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Three main themes were identified: (1) Digital transformation in education, (2) Educational efficacy and evolution, and (3) Overcoming barriers and embracing opportunities. These themes have shown that the introduction of technology is closely linked to pedagogical innovation, as digital tools have transformed educational practise by enabling more interactive, flexible and learner-centred approaches. Additionally, they highlighted the challenges of integrating new technologies into existing educational frameworks. Digital pedagogy in health sciences education remains a dynamic field that demands continuous adaptation and development. To effectively integrate digital tools, teachers need robust support through professional development. This support is essential for creating engaging, inclusive, and effective learning environments. Addressing technological disparities and enhancing digital literacy are critical for fully harnessing the potential of digital education.
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.