How COVID-19 kick-started online learning in medical education-The DigiMed study.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
08
02
2021
accepted:
01
09
2021
entrez:
21
9
2021
pubmed:
22
9
2021
medline:
30
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to far-reaching restrictions of social and professional life, affecting societies all over the world. To contain the virus, medical schools had to restructure their curriculum by switching to online learning. However, only few medical schools had implemented such novel learning concepts. We aimed to evaluate students' attitudes to online learning to provide a broad scientific basis to guide future development of medical education. Overall, 3286 medical students from 12 different countries participated in this cross-sectional, web-based study investigating various aspects of online learning in medical education. On a 7-point Likert scale, participants rated the online learning situation during the pandemic at their medical schools, technical and social aspects, and the current and future role of online learning in medical education. The majority of medical schools managed the rapid switch to online learning (78%) and most students were satisfied with the quantity (67%) and quality (62%) of the courses. Online learning provided greater flexibility (84%) and led to unchanged or even higher attendance of courses (70%). Possible downsides included motivational problems (42%), insufficient possibilities for interaction with fellow students (67%) and thus the risk of social isolation (64%). The vast majority felt comfortable using the software solutions (80%). Most were convinced that medical education lags behind current capabilities regarding online learning (78%) and estimated the proportion of online learning before the pandemic at only 14%. In order to improve the current curriculum, they wish for a more balanced ratio with at least 40% of online teaching compared to on-site teaching. This study demonstrates the positive attitude of medical students towards online learning. Furthermore, it reveals a considerable discrepancy between what students demand and what the curriculum offers. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic might be the long-awaited catalyst for a new "online era" in medical education.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to far-reaching restrictions of social and professional life, affecting societies all over the world. To contain the virus, medical schools had to restructure their curriculum by switching to online learning. However, only few medical schools had implemented such novel learning concepts. We aimed to evaluate students' attitudes to online learning to provide a broad scientific basis to guide future development of medical education.
METHODS
Overall, 3286 medical students from 12 different countries participated in this cross-sectional, web-based study investigating various aspects of online learning in medical education. On a 7-point Likert scale, participants rated the online learning situation during the pandemic at their medical schools, technical and social aspects, and the current and future role of online learning in medical education.
RESULTS
The majority of medical schools managed the rapid switch to online learning (78%) and most students were satisfied with the quantity (67%) and quality (62%) of the courses. Online learning provided greater flexibility (84%) and led to unchanged or even higher attendance of courses (70%). Possible downsides included motivational problems (42%), insufficient possibilities for interaction with fellow students (67%) and thus the risk of social isolation (64%). The vast majority felt comfortable using the software solutions (80%). Most were convinced that medical education lags behind current capabilities regarding online learning (78%) and estimated the proportion of online learning before the pandemic at only 14%. In order to improve the current curriculum, they wish for a more balanced ratio with at least 40% of online teaching compared to on-site teaching.
CONCLUSION
This study demonstrates the positive attitude of medical students towards online learning. Furthermore, it reveals a considerable discrepancy between what students demand and what the curriculum offers. Thus, the COVID-19 pandemic might be the long-awaited catalyst for a new "online era" in medical education.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34547031
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257394
pii: PONE-D-21-04172
pmc: PMC8454930
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0257394Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
J Family Community Med. 2010 Jan;17(1):35-40
pubmed: 22022669
Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2018 Feb;13(2):281-290
pubmed: 29151194
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Jan 04;18(1):e2
pubmed: 26729058
Med Educ. 2020 Oct;54(10):951-952
pubmed: 32392354
Lancet. 2007 Oct 20;370(9596):1453-7
pubmed: 18064739
Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017 Jan 13;8:63-73
pubmed: 28144171
Zentralbl Chir. 2018 Aug;143(4):412-418
pubmed: 28505682
BMC Med Educ. 2018 Jun 7;18(1):130
pubmed: 29880045
Acad Med. 2020 Aug;95(8):1140-1142
pubmed: 32282372
Acad Med. 2010 Feb;85(2):220-7
pubmed: 20107346
Nurs Res. 1990 Mar-Apr;39(2):121-3
pubmed: 2315066
Clin Anat. 2020 Sep;33(6):927-928
pubmed: 32253771
JAMA. 2020 Jun 2;323(21):2131-2132
pubmed: 32232420
J R Coll Physicians Edinb. 2019 Mar;49(1):52-57
pubmed: 30838994
Lancet. 2020 Mar 28;395(10229):1015-1018
pubmed: 32197103
BMC Surg. 2016 Mar 25;16:14
pubmed: 27015842
Med Educ. 2020 Dec;54(12):1190-1191
pubmed: 32418270
Nurse Educ. 2004 May-Jun;29(3):111-5
pubmed: 15167578
J Med Internet Res. 2004 Sep 29;6(3):e34
pubmed: 15471760
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Apr 14;14:81
pubmed: 24731511
Acad Med. 2017 Jan;92(1):16-19
pubmed: 27008357
Acad Med. 1989 Aug;64(8):446-7
pubmed: 2751782
J Med Internet Res. 2012 Apr 02;14(2):e47
pubmed: 22469659
Acad Med. 2012 Nov;87(11):1461-3
pubmed: 23111256
Malays Fam Physician. 2006 Aug 31;1(2-3):70-3
pubmed: 27570591
Anat Sci Educ. 2015 Jan-Feb;8(1):53-62
pubmed: 24920278
Nurse Educ Today. 2006 May;26(4):315-21
pubmed: 16364510
Med Educ. 2016 Oct;50(10):986-91
pubmed: 27628715
Eur Radiol. 2020 Aug;30(8):4656-4663
pubmed: 32221683
Med Teach. 2012;34(4):e216-21
pubmed: 22455712
Future Healthc J. 2019 Oct;6(3):181-185
pubmed: 31660522