Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Randomized controlled trial of asynchronous vs. synchronous online teaching formats: equal knowledge after training, greater acceptance and lower intrinsic motivation through asynchronous online learning.
Trial report 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- ABCD-ReproNim: An educational program for responsible and reproducible analyses of ABCD data.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2026Article
- The Psychology of EdTech Nudging: Persuasion, Cognitive Load, and Intrinsic Motivation.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe growing importance of online education in recent years has led to an increased focus on implementing and optimizing online learning formats. This study investigated how a lecture delivered in an asynchronous or synchronous online teaching format affects acceptance, intrinsic motivation and knowledge levels after training. The results can be used to optimize online education by identifying format-specific advantages and adapting them to learners' needs.
methodsAll the Styrian paramedics (N = 5910) were invited to participate in the study and randomly assigned to one of two groups. A total of 1044 participants completed the trial, with one group receiving asynchronous training via a learning platform (N = 545) and the other group participating in synchronous training via webinars (N = 499) providing the same content. After completing a two-hour psychiatric emergency course, the participants were invited to complete a multiple-choice test and a survey assessing acceptance, preferences and intrinsic motivation. Linear regression, t tests and mediation analyses were conducted.
resultsThe asynchronous training format was significantly more accepted (p <.001) and preferred overall. The participants' preferences depended significantly on the type of learning format (p <.001). The synchronous learning format fostered greater intrinsic motivation (p =.001) and greater perceived autonomy (p <.001) but also a higher level of perceived pressure/tension (p =.003). The analysis revealed no significant difference in test results (p =.449) or perceived competence between the groups (p =.420). Furthermore, the difference in intrinsic motivation was fully mediated by perceived autonomy.
conclusionsThere are different advantages and disadvantages to providing a lecture via webinar or online learning platform. Both formats are equally effective in terms of knowledge levels after training, highlighting the importance of adapting teaching strategies to learners' preferences.
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.