MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3105601594 · doi:10.22374/jeleu.v3i4.110

Effectiveness of Online Teaching During COVID-19 Pandemic for West Midlands Urology Trainees

2020· article· en· W3105601594 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anton Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endoluminal Endourology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationLikert scaleFace-to-faceAttendanceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicMedicineOnline teachingPsychologySocial distanceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objective Urology trainees in the West Midlands are provided with protected compulsory teaching sessions by the deanery. These teaching sessions are usually held in a regional centre, on a face-to-face basis. However, the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has had a profound impact not only on individuals, the healthcare system, but has affected medical education for trainees. All regional teaching sessions have been moved online for the safety of individuals and to comply with social distancing guidelines. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of online teaching during the pandemic. Material and Methods An online survey was sent out to all urology trainees in the West Midlands. The questionnaire, comprised of a mixture of open, closed and Likert-10-point scale questions was used to compare online teaching against face-to-face teaching. An independent t-test was carried out as the data was presumed to follow a normal distribution. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. Results 70% of trainees responded and participated in the survey. Attendance rates were higher when teaching was online compared to face-to-face sessions. 100% of trainees were able to attend at least 80% of online teaching sessions whilst 89% were able to attend face-to-face sessions. However, the quality of teaching were not statistically significant between face-to-face and online teaching sessions (mean = 7.95 and 8.11 respectively, p= 0.316). The study found that trainees benefited from the accessibility of online teaching sessions but lost out on social networking and interactivity of face-to-face sessions. Most participants recommended a hybrid or blended learning approach once the pandemic is over. Conclusion The impact of COVID-19 has almost forced all undergraduate and postgraduate education to have a form of virtual presence. All teaching sessions will remain online for the foreseeable future. Our study found no difference between the qualities of teaching for both approaches. However, benefits and drawbacks of online teaching have been identified. Hence, we recommend a mixed learning approach of face-to-face and online teaching for the future.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Endoluminal EndourologySame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207