GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: BMJ Open, BMJ, Vol. 9, No. 8 ( 2019-08), p. e025252-
    Abstract: Although adaptive e-learning environments (AEEs) can provide personalised instruction to health professional and students, their efficacy remains unclear. Therefore, this review aimed to identify, appraise and synthesise the evidence regarding the efficacy of AEEs in improving knowledge, skills and clinical behaviour in health professionals and students. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science from the first year of records to February 2019. Eligibility criteria Controlled studies that evaluated the effect of an AEE on knowledge, skills or clinical behaviour in health professionals or students. Screening, data extraction and synthesis Two authors screened studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and coded quality of evidence independently. AEEs were reviewed with regard to their topic, theoretical framework and adaptivity process. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they had a non-adaptive e-learning environment control group and had no missing data. Effect sizes (ES) were pooled using a random effects model. Results From a pool of 10 569 articles, we included 21 eligible studies enrolling 3684 health professionals and students. Clinical topics were mostly related to diagnostic testing, theoretical frameworks were varied and the adaptivity process was characterised by five subdomains: method, goals, timing, factors and types. The pooled ES was 0.70 for knowledge (95% CI −0.08 to 1.49; p.08) and 1.19 for skills (95% CI 0.59 to 1.79; p 〈 0.00001). Risk of bias was generally high. Heterogeneity was large in all analyses. Conclusions AEEs appear particularly effective in improving skills in health professionals and students. The adaptivity process within AEEs may be more beneficial for learning skills rather than factual knowledge, which generates less cognitive load. Future research should report more clearly on the design and adaptivity process of AEEs, and target higher-level outcomes, such as clinical behaviour. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017065585
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2044-6055 , 2044-6055
    Language: English
    Publisher: BMJ
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2599832-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: BMJ Open, BMJ, Vol. 10, No. 1 ( 2020-01), p. e032662-
    Abstract: There is a growing interest in developing interprofessional education (IPE) in the community of healthcare educators. Tabletop exercises (TTX) have been proposed as a mean to cultivate collaborative practice. A TTX simulates an emergent situation in an informal environment. Healthcare professionals need to take charge of this situation as a team through a discussion-based approach. As TTX are gaining in popularity, performing a review about their uses could guide educators and researchers. The aim of this scoping review is to map the uses of TTX in healthcare. Methods and analysis A search of the literature will be conducted using medical subject heading terms and keywords in PubMed, Medline, EBM Reviews (Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews), CINAHL (Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Embase and ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), along with a search of the grey literature. The search will be performed after the publication of this protocol (estimated to be January 1st 2020) and will be repeated 1 month prior to the submission for publication of the final review (estimated to be June 1st 2020). Studies reporting on TTX in healthcare and published in English or French will be included. Two reviewers will screen the articles and extract the data. The quality of the included articles will be assessed by two reviewers. To better map their uses, the varying TTX activities will be classified as performed in the context of disaster health or not, for IPE or not and using a board game or not. Moreover, following the same mapping objective, outcomes of TTX will be reported according to the Kirkpatrick model of outcomes of educational programs. Ethics and dissemination No institutional review board approval is required for this review. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings of this review will inform future efforts to TTX into the training of healthcare professionals.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2044-6055 , 2044-6055
    Language: English
    Publisher: BMJ
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2599832-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: BMJ Open, BMJ, Vol. 8, No. 3 ( 2018-03), p. e019871-
    Abstract: Serious games (SGs) are interactive and entertaining digital software with an educational purpose. They engage the learner by proposing challenges and through various design elements (DEs; eg, points, difficulty adaptation, story). Recent reviews suggest the effectiveness of SGs in healthcare professionals’ and students’ education is mixed. This could be explained by the variability in their DEs, which has been shown to be highly variable across studies. The aim of this systematic review is to identify, appraise and synthesise the best available evidence regarding the effectiveness of SGs and the impact of DEs on engagement and educational outcomes of healthcare professionals and students. Methods and analysis A systematic search of the literature will be conducted using a combination of medical subject headings terms and keywords in Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health, Embase, Education Resources Information Center, PsycInFO, PubMed and Web of Science. Studies assessing SGs on engagement and educational outcomes will be included. Two independent reviewers will conduct the screening as well as the data extraction process. The risk of bias of included studies will also be assessed by two reviewers using the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care criteria. Data regarding DEs in SGs will first be synthesised qualitatively. A meta-analysis will then be performed, if the data allow it. Finally, the quality of the evidence regarding the effectiveness of SGs on each outcome will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. Ethics and dissemination As this systematic review only uses already collected data, no Institutional Review Board approval is required. Its results will be submitted in a peer-reviewed journal by the end of 2018. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017077424.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2044-6055 , 2044-6055
    Language: English
    Publisher: BMJ
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2599832-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...