MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1504443159 · doi:10.18438/b83s3r

Despite Barriers, Education Providers, Health Professionals, and Students Perceive E-Learning to Be an Effective Method of Education

2006· article· en· W1504443159 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lorie A. Kloda

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence Based Library and Information Practice · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWeb and Library Services
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPhoneMedical educationMEDLINEMedicineQualitative researchHealth careNursingPsychologySociologySocial sciencePsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A review of: Childs, Sue, Elizabeth Blenkinsopp, Amanda Hall, and Graham Walton. “Effective E-Learning for Health Professionals and Students—Barriers and Their Solutions. A Systematic Review of the Literature—Findings from the HeXL Project.” Health Information & Libraries Journal 22.S2 (2005): 20-32. Objective – To determine barriers or problems and possible solutions related to e-learning, and to determine the effectiveness of e-learning among health professionals and students. Design – Systematic review of qualitative literature, in addition to interviews and questionnaires, to allow for triangulation of the data. Setting – “The HeXL Project: Surmounting the Barriers to NHS E-Learning in the North-East.” The National Health Service (NHS) in the North-East of England, from May 2003 to March 2004. Subjects – A systematic review of 57 qualitative studies on health and e-learning, phone interviews with 13 managers and trainers, and 149 questionnaires completed by users and non-users of e-learning. All participants of the interviews and questionnaires were staff and students of the NHS in the North-East of England. Methods – The study used three methods to collect data to meet the objectives of the study. For the systematic review, the databases AMED (Allied and Alternative Medicine), ASSIA (Applied Social Sciences), CINAHL (Nursing and Allied Health), ERIC (Education), HMIC (health Management), LISA (Library and Information Sciences), PubMed (Medline), and Web of Science were searched using the terms “e-learning” or “computer assisted instruction”, and “health”, and “barriers.” Any type of research or comprehensive literature review was selected from the results to be included in analysis. Based on the findings from the systematic review, a semi-structured interview schedule was developed for use in phone interviews to be conducted with managers or e-learning trainers. Also based on the systematic review, questionnaires were developed and distributed to users and non-users of e-learning. The three methods permitted triangulation of the data. Main results – The search produced 161 results of which 57 met the methodological criteria. The 57 studies categorized e-learning barriers and solutions into eight different issues: organizational, economics, hardware, software, support, pedagogical, psychological, and skills. Results from the interviews and questionnaires mirrored those of the systematic review. Barriers to e-learning included managing change, lack of skills, costs, absence of face-to-face learning, and time commitment. Solutions to the barriers of e-learning included blended learning, better design, skills training, removal of costs, and improved access to technology. There were, however, some discrepancies between the results from the systematic review and the interviews and questionnaires: barriers due to “lack of access to technology” (29) were not perceived as serious, suggested solutions did not include better communication and scheduling, and the solutions to provide trainer incentives and employment admission criteria were rejected. Users and potential users of e-learning mentioned one solution not found in the review: protected time during work to partake in e-learning. Results from the interviews and questionnaires demonstrated that managers, trainers, and learners thought e-learning to be effective. Conclusion – The researchers answered the study’s questions to determine the perceived barriers and solutions to e-learning for the NHS in the North-East of England. Despite the barriers identified, it was also determined from the interviews conducted and questionnaires returned that managers, trainers, and learners perceive e-learning as an effective method of education for health professionals and students. Further research is needed to determine whether this perception is correct. The systematic review of the literature identified important “factors which need to be in place” for e-learning to effectively take place (29). The barriers and potential solutions identified are useful for those designing e-learning programs in any professional context. The results point to several requirements for e-learning success: national standards and strategies; curriculum integration; change management; flexible programming; skills training; and support and access to technology for managers, learners, and trainers. The authors of the article believe that librarians play an important role in e-learning and identify several areas in which librarians can contribute.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence Based Library and Information PracticeSame topicWeb and Library ServicesFrench-language works237,207