Blended Learning Compared to Traditional Learning in Medical Education: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
blended learning
computer-aided instruction
meta-analysis
online learning
traditional learning
virtual patients
Journal
Journal of medical Internet research
ISSN: 1438-8871
Titre abrégé: J Med Internet Res
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 100959882
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 08 2020
10 08 2020
Historique:
received:
04
10
2019
accepted:
13
11
2019
revised:
07
11
2019
entrez:
11
8
2020
pubmed:
11
8
2020
medline:
16
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Blended learning, which combines face-to-face learning and e-learning, has grown rapidly to be commonly used in education. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this learning approach has not been completely quantitatively synthesized and evaluated using knowledge outcomes in health education. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of blended learning compared to that of traditional learning in health education. We performed a systematic review of blended learning in health education in MEDLINE from January 1990 to July 2019. We independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and compared overall blended learning versus traditional learning, offline blended learning versus traditional learning, online blended learning versus traditional learning, digital blended learning versus traditional learning, computer-aided instruction blended learning versus traditional learning, and virtual patient blended learning versus traditional learning. All pooled analyses were based on random-effect models, and the I A total of 56 studies (N=9943 participants) assessing several types of learning support in blended learning met our inclusion criteria; 3 studies investigated offline support, 7 studies investigated digital support, 34 studies investigated online support, 8 studies investigated computer-assisted instruction support, and 5 studies used virtual patient support for blended learning. The pooled analysis comparing all blended learning to traditional learning showed significantly better knowledge outcomes for blended learning (standardized mean difference 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.28, I From this review, blended learning demonstrated consistently better effects on knowledge outcomes when compared with traditional learning in health education. Further studies are needed to confirm these results and to explore the utility of different design variants of blended learning.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Blended learning, which combines face-to-face learning and e-learning, has grown rapidly to be commonly used in education. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of this learning approach has not been completely quantitatively synthesized and evaluated using knowledge outcomes in health education.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of blended learning compared to that of traditional learning in health education.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of blended learning in health education in MEDLINE from January 1990 to July 2019. We independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and compared overall blended learning versus traditional learning, offline blended learning versus traditional learning, online blended learning versus traditional learning, digital blended learning versus traditional learning, computer-aided instruction blended learning versus traditional learning, and virtual patient blended learning versus traditional learning. All pooled analyses were based on random-effect models, and the I
RESULTS
A total of 56 studies (N=9943 participants) assessing several types of learning support in blended learning met our inclusion criteria; 3 studies investigated offline support, 7 studies investigated digital support, 34 studies investigated online support, 8 studies investigated computer-assisted instruction support, and 5 studies used virtual patient support for blended learning. The pooled analysis comparing all blended learning to traditional learning showed significantly better knowledge outcomes for blended learning (standardized mean difference 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.28, I
CONCLUSIONS
From this review, blended learning demonstrated consistently better effects on knowledge outcomes when compared with traditional learning in health education. Further studies are needed to confirm these results and to explore the utility of different design variants of blended learning.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32773378
pii: v22i8e16504
doi: 10.2196/16504
pmc: PMC7445617
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e16504Informations de copyright
©Alexandre Vallée, Jacques Blacher, Alain Cariou, Emmanuel Sorbets. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (http://www.jmir.org), 10.08.2020.
Références
J Adv Nurs. 2004 Apr;46(1):5-12
pubmed: 15030437
BMC Med Educ. 2006 Aug 14;6:40
pubmed: 16907972
J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2014 Oct;2(4):146-50
pubmed: 25512938
J Nurs Staff Dev. 1997 Nov-Dec;13(6):293-301
pubmed: 9429370
BMJ. 2011 Oct 18;343:d5928
pubmed: 22008217
Eur J Dent Educ. 2012 Feb;16(1):e88-95
pubmed: 22251359
J Dent Educ. 2007 Sep;71(9):1187-93
pubmed: 17761625
Comput Inform Nurs. 2014 Jul;32(7):343-52
pubmed: 24633234
Nurse Educ Today. 2012 Jul;32(5):e14-8
pubmed: 22071277
Nurse Educ Today. 2010 Jul;30(5):464-9
pubmed: 19931950
J Glob Health. 2014 Jun;4(1):010405
pubmed: 24976964
Perspect Med Educ. 2016 Feb;5(1):33-8
pubmed: 26754313
J Nurs Educ. 2007 Mar;46(3):140-5
pubmed: 17396555
Br Dent J. 2010 Dec 11;209(11):571-6
pubmed: 21151070
Resuscitation. 2010 Jul;81(7):877-81
pubmed: 20409627
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jan 04;18(1):e2
pubmed: 26729058
Int J Nurs Stud. 2006 Aug;43(6):767-74
pubmed: 16253261
Front Psychol. 2014 Nov 12;5:1278
pubmed: 25429276
Simul Healthc. 2016 Jun;11(3):181-9
pubmed: 26841278
Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Jun;82:30-39
pubmed: 29574394
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Jan 27;14:16
pubmed: 24467710
J Dent Hyg. 2004 Fall;78(4):10
pubmed: 16197750
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jan 05;17(1):e3
pubmed: 25560547
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Apr 24;21(4):e12968
pubmed: 31017584
J Adv Nurs. 2011 Nov;67(11):2435-44
pubmed: 21592188
BMJ. 2001 Jan 6;322(7277):40-4
pubmed: 11141156
J Med Internet Res. 2017 May 01;19(5):e116
pubmed: 28461286
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Feb 01;15:11
pubmed: 25638167
Med Educ. 1991 Sep;25(5):389-95
pubmed: 1758315
J Dent Educ. 2013 Jun;77(6):732-43
pubmed: 23740910
Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2018 Oct;37(5):411-415
pubmed: 29175318
JMIR Res Protoc. 2019 Mar 25;8(3):e12488
pubmed: 30907743
BMC Med Educ. 2013 Dec 17;13:169
pubmed: 24341502
S Afr Med J. 1996 Sep;86(9):1098-102
pubmed: 8888778
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2010 Aug;15(3):349-56
pubmed: 19774475
BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 26;7(12):e018811
pubmed: 29282268
J Allied Health. 2009 Spring;38(1):E11-6
pubmed: 19753407
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Oct 19;16(1):274
pubmed: 27756288
Acad Med. 2002 May;77(5):446-9
pubmed: 12010707
Anat Sci Educ. 2016 Oct;9(5):411-21
pubmed: 26950521
J Nurs Educ. 2008 Jan;47(1):13-9
pubmed: 18232610
Med Educ. 2009 Apr;43(4):303-11
pubmed: 19335571
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jul 02;17(7):e162
pubmed: 26139388
Int J Nurs Educ Scholarsh. 2010;7:Article43
pubmed: 21126230
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2018 Jun 11;2018:7918258
pubmed: 29991956
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Mar 11;14:47
pubmed: 24612923
JAMA. 2008 Sep 10;300(10):1181-96
pubmed: 18780847
Palliat Med. 2008 Dec;22(8):929-37
pubmed: 18772211
Trauma Mon. 2015 Nov;20(4):e25607
pubmed: 26839862
Med Educ. 2001 Sep;35(9):824-32
pubmed: 11555219
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Jul 02;21(7):e14676
pubmed: 31267981
J Med Internet Res. 2019 Feb 12;21(2):e12937
pubmed: 30747711
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2017 Sep 14;5(9):e139
pubmed: 28912113
Eur J Radiol. 2011 Jun;78(3):384-7
pubmed: 21288674
BMC Med Educ. 2012 Jun 18;12:41
pubmed: 22709278
Can J Surg. 2006 Dec;49(6):412-6
pubmed: 17234070
Med Teach. 2008 Feb;30(1):25-33
pubmed: 18278648
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 09;11(2):e0148882
pubmed: 26859832
Eye (Lond). 2013 Oct;27(10):1151-7
pubmed: 23867718
J Adv Nurs. 2015 Feb;71(2):255-70
pubmed: 25134985
BMC Med Educ. 2016 Apr 23;16:122
pubmed: 27108089
Eye (Lond). 2001 Oct;15(Pt 5):635-9
pubmed: 11702976
Nurs Educ Perspect. 2013 Sep-Oct;34(5):315-22
pubmed: 24245382
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):e1-34
pubmed: 19631507
J Nurses Staff Dev. 2012 Jul;28(4):186-90
pubmed: 22821022
Man Ther. 2012 Oct;17(5):474-8
pubmed: 22579034
BMC Med Educ. 2015 Mar 10;15:39
pubmed: 25884717
J Orthod. 2001 Dec;28(4):307-11
pubmed: 11709597
J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2017 Jul 14;4:2382120517720428
pubmed: 29349338
BMC Emerg Med. 2018 Jan 15;18(1):1
pubmed: 29334925
BMC Med Educ. 2013 Apr 19;13:57
pubmed: 23601853
J Clin Sleep Med. 2012 Aug 15;8(4):439-43
pubmed: 22893775
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1996 Jun;150(6):629-31
pubmed: 8646314
BMC Med Educ. 2019 May 15;19(1):147
pubmed: 31092243
Nurs Educ Perspect. 2013 Nov-Dec;34(6):377-82
pubmed: 24475598
Comput Nurs. 2000 Nov-Dec;18(6):282-7
pubmed: 11105402
Postgrad Med J. 2007 Apr;83(978):212-6
pubmed: 17403945
J Glob Health. 2014 Jun;4(1):010406
pubmed: 24976965
Med Teach. 2012;34(4):e216-21
pubmed: 22455712
J Chiropr Educ. 2019 Mar;33(1):21-29
pubmed: 30444635
Adv Physiol Educ. 2005 Mar;29(1):35-9
pubmed: 15718381
Nurse Educ Today. 2009 Jan;29(1):65-72
pubmed: 18703258
Nurse Educ Today. 2008 Nov;28(8):943-52
pubmed: 18599162
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2009 Dec;14(5):725-38
pubmed: 19184497
JAMA. 2012 Dec 5;308(21):2218-25
pubmed: 23212499
Perspect Med Educ. 2014 Sep;3(4):289-99
pubmed: 24477971
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2013 Mar;98(2):F141-4
pubmed: 22684155
Int J Emerg Med. 2011 Aug 08;4:51
pubmed: 21824405
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2011 Winter;31(1):43-8
pubmed: 21425359
Acad Med. 2010 Oct;85(10):1589-602
pubmed: 20703150
BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557-60
pubmed: 12958120