MétaCan
← all works

Instructional Design Variations in Internet-Based Learning for Health Professions Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2010· review· en· 584 citations· W2085403719 on OpenAlex· 10.1097/acm.0b013e3181d6c319

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

About CanadaIts subject is Canada, wherever its authors sit.

No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame — the usual design — would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Machine scores (provisional)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.259
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread
0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

PURPOSE: A recent systematic review (2008) described the effectiveness of Internet-based learning (IBL) in health professions education. A comprehensive synthesis of research investigating how to improve IBL is needed. This systematic review sought to provide such a synthesis. METHOD: The authors searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, TimeLit, and the University of Toronto Research and Development Resource Base for articles published from 1990 through November 2008. They included all studies quantifying the effect of IBL compared with another Internet-based or computer-assisted instructional intervention on practicing and student physicians, nurses, pharmacists, dentists, and other health professionals. Reviewers working independently and in duplicate abstracted information, coded study quality, and grouped studies according to inductively identified themes. RESULTS: From 2,705 articles, the authors identified 51 eligible studies, including 30 randomized trials. The pooled effect size (ES) for learning outcomes in 15 studies investigating high versus low interactivity was 0.27 (95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.46; P = .006). Also associated with higher learning were practice exercises (ES 0.40 [0.08-0.71; P = .01]; 10 studies), feedback (ES 0.68 [0.01-1.35; P = .047]; 2 studies), and repetition of study material (ES 0.19 [0.09-0.30; P < .001]; 2 studies). The ES was 0.26 (-0.62 to 1.13; P = .57) for three studies examining online discussion. Inconsistency was large (I(2) >or=89%) in most analyses. Meta-analyses for other themes generally yielded imprecise results. CONCLUSIONS: Interactivity, practice exercises, repetition, and feedback seem to be associated with improved learning outcomes, although inconsistency across studies tempers conclusions. Evidence for other instructional variations remains inconclusive.

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.

The record

Venue
Academic Medicine
Topic
Dental Research and COVID-19
Field
Dentistry
Canadian institutions
Funders
Keywords
CINAHLScopusMEDLINEMeta-analysisMedical educationMedicineSystematic reviewInteractivityThe InternetRandomized controlled trialInstructional designPsychologyNursingComputer scienceMultimediaInternal medicinePsychological interventionWorld Wide WebMathematics education
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes