首页> 外文OA文献 >A randomised controlled trial of a blended learning education intervention for teaching evidence-based medicine
【2h】

A randomised controlled trial of a blended learning education intervention for teaching evidence-based medicine

机译:混合学习教育干预措施循证医学教学的随机对照试验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Few studies have been performed to inform how best to teach evidence-based medicine (EBM) to medical trainees. Current evidence can only conclude that any form of teaching increases EBM competency, but cannot distinguish which form of teaching is most effective at increasing student competency in EBM. This study compared the effectiveness of a blended learning (BL) versus didactic learning (DL) approach of teaching EBM to medical students with respect to competency, self-efficacy, attitudes and behaviour toward EBM. Methods: A mixed methods study consisting of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) and qualitative case study was performed with medical students undertaking their first clinical year of training in EBM. Students were randomly assigned to receive EBM teaching via either a BL approach or the incumbent DL approach. Competency in EBM was assessed using the Berlin questionnaire and the \u27Assessing Competency in EBM\u27 (ACE) tool. Students\u27 self-efficacy, attitudes and behaviour was also assessed. A series of focus groups was also performed to contextualise the quantitative results. Results: A total of 147 students completed the RCT, and a further 29 students participated in six focus group discussions. Students who received the BL approach to teaching EBM had significantly higher scores in 5 out of 6 behaviour domains, 3 out of 4 attitude domains and 10 out of 14 self-efficacy domains. Competency in EBM did not differ significantly between students receiving the BL approach versus those receiving the DL approach [Mean Difference (MD)=-0.68, (95% CI-1.71, 0.34), p=0.19]. No significant difference was observed between sites (p=0.89) or by student type (p=0.58). Focus group discussions suggested a strong student preference for teaching using a BL approach, which integrates lectures, online learning and small group activities. Conclusions: BL is no more effective than DL at increasing medical students\u27 knowledge and skills in EBM, but was significantly more effective at increasing student attitudes toward EBM and self-reported use of EBM in clinical practice. Given the various learning styles preferred by students, a multifaceted approach (incorporating BL) may be best suited when teaching EBM to medical students. Further research on the cost-effectiveness of EBM teaching modalities is required.
机译:背景:很少有研究可以告知如何最好地向医学研修生教授循证医学(EBM)。当前的证据只能得出结论,任何形式的教学都可以提高EBM能力,但不能区分哪种形式的教学最有效地提高学生的EBM能力。这项研究比较了混合学习(BL)和教学法(DL)的方法向医学生教授EBM的能力,自我效能感,对EBM的态度和行为的有效性。方法:采用随机对照试验(RCT)和定性案例研究的混合方法研究,对医学生进行了临床第一年的EBM培训。通过BL方法或现行DL方法将学生随机分配到接受EBM教学。使用柏林问卷和“评估EBM能力”(ACE)工具评估了EBM能力。还评估了学生的自我效能,态度和行为。还进行了一系列的焦点小组讨论,以量化定量结果。结果:共有147名学生完成了RCT,另外29名学生参加了六个焦点小组讨论。接受BL方法进行EBM教学的学生在6个行为领域中有5个,在4个态度领域中有3个在14个自我效能领域中有10个更高的分数。在接受BL方法的学生与接受DL方法的学生之间,EBM能力没有显着差异[平均差异(MD)=-0.68,(95%CI-1.71,0.34),p = 0.19]。在站点之间(p = 0.89)或按学生类型(p = 0.58)没有观察到显着差异。焦点小组讨论表明,学生强烈倾向于使用BL方法进行教学,该方法结合了讲座,在线学习和小组活动。结论:BL在增加医学生对EBM的知识和技能方面不比DL有效,但在增加学生对EBM的态度以及在临床实践中自我报告的使用EBM方面,BL显着更有效。考虑到学生喜欢的各种学习方式,向医学生教授EBM时,最适合采用多方面的方法(结合BL)。需要对EBM教学模式的成本效益进行进一步研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号