scholarly journals Correction: Effectiveness of Adaptive E-Learning Environments on Knowledge, Competence, and Behavior in Health Professionals and Students: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. e131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Fontaine ◽  
Sylvie Cossette ◽  
Marc-André Maheu-Cadotte ◽  
Tanya Mailhot ◽  
Marie-France Deschênes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
E Learning ◽  
And Behavior

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Adaptive E-Learning Environments on Knowledge, Competence, and Behavior in Health Professionals and Students: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (7) ◽  
pp. e128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Fontaine ◽  
Sylvie Cossette ◽  
Marc-André Maheu-Cadotte ◽  
Tanya Mailhot ◽  
Marie-France Deschênes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Learning Environments ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
E Learning ◽  
And Behavior

scholarly journals Efficacy of adaptive e-learning for health professionals and students: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. e025252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Fontaine ◽  
Sylvie Cossette ◽  
Marc-André Maheu-Cadotte ◽  
Tanya Mailhot ◽  
Marie-France Deschênes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Factual Knowledge ◽  
Clinical Behaviour ◽  
Environment Control ◽  
E Learning

ObjectiveAlthough 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.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesCINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science from the first year of records to February 2019.Eligibility criteriaControlled studies that evaluated the effect of an AEE on knowledge, skills or clinical behaviour in health professionals or students.Screening, data extraction and synthesisTwo 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.ResultsFrom 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.ConclusionsAEEs 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 numberCRD42017065585

scholarly journals A systematic review and meta-analysis of meditative interventions for informal caregivers and health professionals

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 160-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marisa Dharmawardene ◽  
Jane Givens ◽  
Amy Wachholtz ◽  
Suzana Makowski ◽  
Jennifer Tjia
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Informal Caregivers

scholarly journals Despite Barriers, Education Providers, Health Professionals, and Students Perceive E-Learning to Be an Effective Method of Education

2006 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Lorie Andrea Kloda
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Skills Training ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
North East ◽  
The North ◽  
Access To Technology ◽  
E Learning

A review of: Childs, Sue, Elizabeth Blenkinsopp, Amanda Hall, and Graham Walton. “Effective E-Learning for Health Professionals and Students—Barriers and Their Solutions. A Systematic Review of the Literature—Findings from the HeXL Project.” Health Information & Libraries Journal 22.S2 (2005): 20-32. Objective – To determine barriers or problems and possible solutions related to e-learning, and to determine the effectiveness of e-learning among health professionals and students. Design – Systematic review of qualitative literature, in addition to interviews and questionnaires, to allow for triangulation of the data. Setting – “The HeXL Project: Surmounting the Barriers to NHS E-Learning in the North-East.” The National Health Service (NHS) in the North-East of England, from May 2003 to March 2004. Subjects – A systematic review of 57 qualitative studies on health and e-learning, phone interviews with 13 managers and trainers, and 149 questionnaires completed by users and non-users of e-learning. All participants of the interviews and questionnaires were staff and students of the NHS in the North-East of England. Methods – The study used three methods to collect data to meet the objectives of the study. For the systematic review, the databases AMED (Allied and Alternative Medicine), ASSIA (Applied Social Sciences), CINAHL (Nursing and Allied Health), ERIC (Education), HMIC (health Management), LISA (Library and Information Sciences), PubMed (Medline), and Web of Science were searched using the terms “e-learning” or “computer assisted instruction”, and “health”, and “barriers.” Any type of research or comprehensive literature review was selected from the results to be included in analysis. Based on the findings from the systematic review, a semi-structured interview schedule was developed for use in phone interviews to be conducted with managers or e-learning trainers. Also based on the systematic review, questionnaires were developed and distributed to users and non-users of e-learning. The three methods permitted triangulation of the data. Main results – The search produced 161 results of which 57 met the methodological criteria. The 57 studies categorized e-learning barriers and solutions into eight different issues: organizational, economics, hardware, software, support, pedagogical, psychological, and skills. Results from the interviews and questionnaires mirrored those of the systematic review. Barriers to e-learning included managing change, lack of skills, costs, absence of face-to-face learning, and time commitment. Solutions to the barriers of e-learning included blended learning, better design, skills training, removal of costs, and improved access to technology. There were, however, some discrepancies between the results from the systematic review and the interviews and questionnaires: barriers due to “lack of access to technology” (29) were not perceived as serious, suggested solutions did not include better communication and scheduling, and the solutions to provide trainer incentives and employment admission criteria were rejected. Users and potential users of e-learning mentioned one solution not found in the review: protected time during work to partake in e-learning. Results from the interviews and questionnaires demonstrated that managers, trainers, and learners thought e-learning to be effective. Conclusion – The researchers answered the study’s questions to determine the perceived barriers and solutions to e-learning for the NHS in the North-East of England. Despite the barriers identified, it was also determined from the interviews conducted and questionnaires returned that managers, trainers, and learners perceive e-learning as an effective method of education for health professionals and students. Further research is needed to determine whether this perception is correct. The systematic review of the literature identified important “factors which need to be in place” for e-learning to effectively take place (29). The barriers and potential solutions identified are useful for those designing e-learning programs in any professional context. The results point to several requirements for e-learning success: national standards and strategies; curriculum integration; change management; flexible programming; skills training; and support and access to technology for managers, learners, and trainers. The authors of the article believe that librarians play an important role in e-learning and identify several areas in which librarians can contribute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document