Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40471747›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

Developing and Testing a Framework for Learning Online Collaborative Creativity in Medical Education: Cross-Sectional Study.

Shairah Radzi, Joo Seng Tan, Preman Rajalingam, Jennifer Cleland, Sreenivasulu Reddy Mogali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shairah RadziLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, 11 Mandalay road, Singapore, 308232, Singapore, 65 65923114.ORCID 0000-0003-4510-5108
Joo Seng TanNanyang Business School, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-1343-6095
Preman RajalingamInstitute of Learning, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0001-6612-205X
Jennifer ClelandLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, 11 Mandalay road, Singapore, 308232, Singapore, 65 65923114.ORCID 0000-0003-1433-9323
Sreenivasulu Reddy MogaliLee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University Singapore, 11 Mandalay road, Singapore, 308232, Singapore, 65 65923114.ORCID 0000-0002-0981-5607

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Collaborative creativity (CC) is a social process of generating creative and innovative solutions to real-world problems through collective effort and interaction. By engaging in this process, medical students can develop abilities and mindset for creative thinking, teamwork, interdisciplinary learning, complex problem-solving, and enhanced patient care. However, medical students have demonstrated limited creativity, constrained by existing pedagogical approaches that predominantly emphasize knowledge outcomes. The increasing complexity of health care challenges necessitates a pedagogical framework for medical students to foster CC in a rapidly evolving professional environment. Objective: This study aimed to develop, test, and evaluate a new Framework for Learning Online Collaborative Creativity (FLOCC). Methods: FLOCC builds on established pedagogical approaches such as design thinking and integrates sociocultural learning methods (team-based learning [TBL] and problem-based learning [PBL]). It includes 4 individual asynchronous activities (empathy map, frame your challenge, turning insights into how might we questions, and individual brainstorming) and 5 collaborative synchronous activities (bundle ideas, list constraints, final idea, prototyping, and blind testing). In this cross-sectional study, 85 undergraduate medical students participated in 2 separate studies (study 1, n=44; study 2, n=41) involving health care and engineering sustainability problems. Learner acceptability was measured using a 31-item survey (using 7-point Likert scale) consisting of 4 factors (distributed creativity, synergistic social collaboration, time regulation and achievement, and self and emotions) and 3 free text questions. Free-text comments were subjected to the inductive thematic analysis. Results: Most students were positive about FLOCC, with distributed creativity and synergistic social collaboration factors receiving the highest mean percentages of "'Agree" (78/85, 92% and 75/85, 88%, respectively). These were followed by time regulation and achievement factor (68/85, 80%) and the self and emotions factor (59/85, 70%). Only time regulation and achievement was statistically significant (P=.001) between means of studies 1 and 2. Thematic analysis revealed 4 themes such as learning experiences, collaborative responsibilities, perceived skill development, and technical challenges. Conclusions: With effective time management, FLOCC shows potential as a framework for nurturing CC in medical students. Medical schools could provide the opportunity and environment that supports creative thinking; therefore, creativity-focused approaches could be integrated into the curriculum to encourage a culture of creativity for breakthrough solutions by future doctors.

Indexed as

Cooperative BehaviorCreativityEducation, DistanceEducation, MedicalEducation, Medical, UndergraduateStudents, MedicalAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleProblem-Based LearningYoung Adultcollaborative creativitycollaborative learningdesign thinkingmedical educationsocial cultural learning

Identifiers

PMID40471747
PMCPMC12161162

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.