ArticleCureus2025
Utilization of Electronic Devices and Online Education Tools for Learning Among Undergraduate Medical Students of a Tertiary Care Teaching Hospital: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Online learning resource preferences across learning stages: a cognitive load theory perspective in UK medical students in early years.BMC 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Mobile learning and digital educational tools have revolutionized medical education globally. This study explores the usage patterns and perceptions of electronic devices and online educational tools among undergraduate medical students in a tertiary care hospital in India. Materials and methods A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted at a tertiary care teaching hospital among undergraduate medical students. A validated questionnaire covering three domains (general use, learning use, and attitudes) was distributed through Google Forms (Google LLC, Mountain View, CA, USA). Data were analyzed for statistical association of the usefulness of online educational tools and the attitude of students toward online education tools by the chi-square test. Cronbach's alpha was calculated for attitude questions. Results Of 400 students, 322 (80.5%) participated. Smartphones were the most commonly used devices among 151 (46.9%) students, and 252 (78.26%) students used online educational platforms. Marrow and YouTube were the most popular educational platforms. Most students found online tools helpful in various aspects. For learning new concepts, 319 (99.1%) students; for revision, 297 (92.2%) students; and for self-assessment, 288 (89.4%) students stated online tools as helpful, which was statistically significant (p<0.05). While students appreciated digital learning, many remained neutral or skeptical about replacing traditional methods. Association for all the questions of attitude was statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusions Undergraduate medical students at our tertiary care teaching hospital widely adopt digital education tools. While digital platforms enhance learning, challenges such as cost and potential distractions warrant consideration in overemphasizing the use of online education tools.
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.