METHODS: COPT was a teaching strategy wherein, students were taught physiology using cases and critical thinking questions. Three batches of undergraduate medical students (n = 434) served as the experimental groups to whom COPT was incorporated in the third block (teaching unit) of Physiology curriculum and one batch (n = 149) served as the control group to whom COPT was not incorporated. The experimental group of students were trained to answer clinically oriented questions whereas the control group of students were not trained. Both the group of students undertook a block exam which consisted of clinically oriented questions and recall questions, at the end of each block.
RESULTS: Comparison of pre-COPT and post-COPT essay exam scores of experimental group of students revealed that the post-COPT scores were significantly higher compared to the pre-COPT scores. Comparison of post-COPT essay exam scores of the experimental group and control group of students revealed that the experimental group of students performed better compared to the control group. Feedback from the students indicated that they preferred COPT to didactic lectures.
CONCLUSION: The study supports the fact that assessment and teaching patterns should fall in line with each other as proved by the better performance of the experimental group of students compared to the control group. COPT was also found to be a useful adjunct to didactic lectures in teaching physiology.
METHODS: A survey was distributed to medical students in three consecutive years: 2017-2019. The survey contains items regarding student perception of various types of blended learning techniques applied in the course. The survey was administered using i-Clicker; an interactive device that enables students to answer survey questions. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the perception of students on these blended learning dimensions investigated.
RESULTS: Seven-hundred and one student responded to the questionnaire (male; 69.5%, female 30.5%). Out of which, 59.1% of students found team interactions positively supported discussions and asked questions freely, and 48.1% expressed that working in groups facilitated their learning process. However, 56.0% of students chose face-to-face lectures as the most preferred class activities followed by discussion 23.8%. More than 78% of participants agree that online quizzes are good experience and enjoyable. Grade center where students can check for marks and attendance also received high perception (66.3%).
CONCLUSION: Introducing modified team-based and blended-learning are considered challenging, and therefore, investigating their perceptions can provide useful insights into how these methods could be used more effectively. The blended-learning technique is highly essential in teaching medical informatics to overcome challenges faced due to a large number of students and the need for various exposures to reach the course's learning goals. Moreover, it is noticed that students were engaged in face-to-face and online activities, furthermore, modified team-based learning reported facilitating learning and asking questions without embarrassment.
METHODS: Fifth year dental students at JUST were invited to fill out a paper based self-administered questionnaire. Data was collected on students` demographics, their future career plans and the impact of social and economic changes on such plans, their interest in postgraduate studies and the specialty of choice in addition to the influence of a group of factors on that choice. Data was also collected on the value of non-academic workshops, guidance regarding career plans, participants` preferred pattern of work (full-time versus part-time) and retirement plans. Students were categorized according to their nationalities. Pearson's chi squared test, one way ANOVA and post hoc tests were used to measure statistical significance between measured variables and backgrounds of participants. The level of significance was set at P ≤ 0.05.
RESULTS: A total of 227 students completed the survey (response rate = 84%). 47% of the participants were Jordanians, 27% were Malaysians, 11% were from Gulf States (Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar), 10% were from conflict zones in the Middle East (Syria, Iraq, Palestine and Yemen) and 5% comprised students from other nationalities. Significant differences were found between students from different backgrounds in their funding sources (Chi square = 132, P
METHOD: This study was designed based on PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases were searched with relevant keywords. After study selection according to inclusion criteria, data of knowledge and attitude were extracted for meta-analysis.
RESULT: Twenty-two studies included 8491 participants were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled analysis revealed a proportion of 0.44 (95%CI = [0.34, 0.54], P
METHODS: This was a descriptive, questionnaire-based, cross-sectional study conducted at three higher education institutions in Malaysia. A previously published questionnaire with 62 characteristics was adopted with modifications after pre-testing. Descriptive analysis was completed for the demographic data. The sample was grouped based on health profession, clinical practice experience and teaching experience for further analysis. Non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis test was selected to evaluate differences in mean ranks to assess the null hypothesis that the medians are equal across the groups. Kruskal-Wallis post-hoc pair wise comparison was performed on samples with significant differences across samples.
RESULTS: The sample was comprised of 173 supervisors from medicine (55, 32%), pharmacy (84, 48%) and nursing (34, 20%). The majority (63%) of the supervisors were currently in professional practice. A high percentage (40%) of supervisors had less than 4 years of teaching experience. The highest theme ratings were for willingness (6.00) and professionalism (5.90). There was a significant difference (p
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Thailand with 130 stakeholders (e.g., policy makers, pharmacy experts, educators, health care providers, patients, students and parents) from August-October 2013. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using an inductive thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Three main themes were derived from the findings: 1. influences on curriculum change (e.g., the needs of pharmacists to provide better patient care, the US-Thai consortium for the development of pharmacy education); 2. perceived benefits (e.g., improve pharmacy competencies from generalists to specialists, ready to work after graduation, providing a high quality of patient care); and 3. concerns (e.g., the higher costs of study for a longer period of time, the mismatch between the pharmacy graduates' competency and the job market's needs, insufficient preceptors and training sites, lack of practical experience of the faculty members and issues related to the separate licenses that are necessary due to the difference in the graduates' specialties).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to highlight the issues surrounding the transition to the 6-year PharmD programme in Thailand, which was initiated due to the need for higher levels of competency among the nation's pharmacists. The transition was influenced by many factors. Many participants perceived benefits from the new pharmacy curriculum. However, some participants were concerned about this transition. Although most of the respondents accepted the need to go forward to the 6-year PharmD programme, designing an effective curriculum, providing a sufficient number of qualified PharmD preceptors, determining certain competencies of pharmacists in different practices and monitoring the quality of pharmacy education still need to be addressed during this transitional stage of pharmacy education in Thailand.
METHOD: Two categories of participants, i.e., medical doctors (n = 11) and final year medical students (Group 1, n = 5; Group 2, n = 10) participated in four separate focus group discussions. Nielsen's 5 dimensions of usability (i.e. learnability, effectiveness, memorability, errors, and satisfaction) and Pentland's narrative network were adapted as the framework to study the usability and the implementation of the checklist in a real clinical setting respectively.
RESULTS: Both categories (medical doctors and medical students) of participants found that the TWED checklist was easy to learn and effective in promoting metacognition. For medical student participants, items "T" and "W" were believed to be the two most useful aspects of the checklist, whereas for the doctor participants, it was item "D". Regarding its implementation, item "T" was applied iteratively, items "W" and "E" were applied when the outcomes did not turn out as expected, and item "D" was applied infrequently. The one checkpoint where all four items were applied was after the initial history taking and physical examination had been performed to generate the initial clinical impression.
CONCLUSION: A metacognitive checklist aimed to check cognitive errors may be a useful tool that can be implemented in the real clinical setting.
METHODS: This questionnaire is divided into two parts. Part A is to evaluate the clinicians' awareness towards cognitive errors in clinical decision making while Part B is to evaluate their perception towards specific cognitive errors. Content validation for both parts was first determined followed by construct validation for Part A. Construct validation for Part B was not determined as the responses were set in a dichotomous format.
RESULTS: For content validation, all items in both Part A and Part B were rated as "excellent" in terms of their relevance in clinical settings. For construct validation using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) for Part A, a two-factor model with total variance extraction of 60% was determined. Two items were deleted. Then, the EFA was repeated showing that all factor loadings are above the cut-off value of >0.5. The Cronbach's alpha for both factors are above 0.6.
CONCLUSION: The CATChES questionnaire tool is a valid questionnaire tool aimed to evaluate the awareness among clinicians toward cognitive errors in clinical decision making.
METHODS: A total of 88 final year medical students were assigned to either an educational intervention group or a control group in a non-equivalent group post-test only design. Participants in the intervention group received a tutorial on the use of a mnemonic checklist aimed to minimize cognitive errors in clinical decision-making. Two weeks later, the participants in both groups were given a script concordance test consisting of 10 cases, with 3 items per case, to assess their clinical decisions when additional data are given in the case scenarios.
RESULTS: The Mann-Whitney U-test performed on the total scores from both groups showed no statistical significance (U = 792, z = -1.408, p = 0.159). When comparisons were made for the first half and the second half of the SCT, it was found that participants in the intervention group performed significantly better than participants in the control group in the first half of the test, with median scores of 9.15 (IQR 8.00-10.28) vs. 8.18 (IQR 7.16-9.24) respectively, U = 642.5, z = -2.661, p = 0.008. No significant difference was found in the second half of the test, with the median score of 9.58 (IQR 8.90-10.56) vs. 9.81 (IQR 8.83-11.12) for the intervention group and control group respectively (U = 897.5, z = -0.524, p = 0.60).
CONCLUSION: Checklist use in differential diagnoses consideration did show some benefit. However, this benefit seems to have been traded off by the time and effort in using it. More research is needed to determine whether this benefit could be translated into clinical practice after repetitive use.
METHODS: Using the Mechanics-Dynamics-Aesthetics' (MDA) framework, a new, tutorless educational board game known as the Simulated Disaster Management And Response Triage training ("SMARTriage") was first developed for disaster response training. Subsequently, the perceptions of 113 final year medical students on the "SMARTriage" board game was compared with that of tabletop exercise using a crossover design.
RESULTS: Using Wilcoxon signed rank test, it was that found that tabletop exercise was generally rated significantly higher (with p
METHODS: The study consisted of two phases. In Phase 1, a 10-item instrument (SAIL-10) was developed and tested on a cohort of medical and pharmacy students who attended the workshop. In Phase 2, different cohorts of medical and pharmacy students completed SAIL-10 before and after participating in the workshop.
RESULTS: Factor analysis showed that SAIL-10 has two domains: "facilitators of interprofessional learning" and "acceptance to learning in groups". The overall SAIL-10 and the two domains have adequate internal consistency and stable reliability. The total score and scores for the two domains were significantly higher after students attended the prescribing skills workshop.
CONCLUSIONS: This study produced a valid and reliable instrument, SAIL-10 which was used to demonstrate that the prescribing skills workshop, where medical and pharmacy students were placed in an authentic context, was a promising activity to promote interprofessional learning among future healthcare professionals.
METHODS: Data were collected from a self-administered questionnaire distributed among 164 Year 2 medical students. The 5-point Likert scale anchored by Strongly disagree = 1 and Strongly agree = 5 included 36 questions in four domains designed to assess the perception of a biostatistics and epidemiology module amongst students.
RESULTS: 138 students with ages ranging from 20 to 24 years (Mean = 20.7; SD = 0.62) returned their responses to the questionnaire. This was a response rate of 84.14%. Of the 138 students, 80.7% realized the relevance of the subject to real health issues at the end of the module, while 89.8% believed the module focused on interpretation more than calculation.More than three quarters (78.1%) agreed that lack of practicing exercises was the cause for declining interest in the subject, while only 26.1% believed that lectures were not interesting. Another three quarters (75.4%) believed that there were too many lectures for one day of teaching activities, while 84.6% recommended practical sessions for designing research and data collection.
CONCLUSIONS: This study found that students perceived the relevance of biostatistics and epidemiology to real health issues. The major cause of poor interest in the subject was attributed to the short duration of the course, lack of practicing exercises, and the need for practical data collection sessions. Emphasis should be given to early introduction of projects for data collection and analysis.
METHODS: The validated Grasha-Riechmann teaching style inventory was administered online for data collection and used SPSS version 20.0 for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Of the 460 invitees, 248 responded (response rate; 54%). Delegator teaching style was most common with a highest median and mean of 2.38 and 2.45, respectively. There was a significant correlation between expert and authority teaching styles, correlation coefficient 0.62. Similarly, we found a significant correlation between authority teaching style and nature of curriculum, correlation coefficient 0.30. Multiple regression analysis showed that only authority teaching style and male gender had significant correlation. Interestingly, 117 (47%) teachers disagreed with the teaching philosophy of delivering course contents by strictly following learning outcomes. Female teachers (114/248) were more willing to negotiate with their students regarding how and what to teach in their course, while male teachers tended to allow more autonomy by allowing students to set their learning agenda.
CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the medical teachers preferred delegator teacher style that promotes students' collaboration and peer-to-peer learning. Most teachers are conscious of their teaching styles to motivate students for scientific curiosity. These findings can help medical educators to modify their teaching styles for effective learning.
METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 22 faculty staff who were involved in ROOBE in health professions programmes. All interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic analysis approach. The perceptions of 249 medical students were obtained using an online questionnaire after they completed ROOBE.
RESULTS: The faculty agreed that open book examinations could promote students' higher order cognitive skills and reduce students' stress. However, they were concerned about students' academic integrity during non-invigilated ROOBE which could affect recognition by accreditation and professional bodies. The shift from traditional practice of closed-book examinations to ROOBE required change management with the support of guidelines and faculty training. Majority of the students claimed that the examinations were challenging as they assessed their ability to apply knowledge in real world problems. Nevertheless, they preferred ROOBE due to less anxiety and memorisation, and more emphasis on problem solving skills. The shortcomings were insufficient time for information searching during examinations and uncertainty in preparedness for future practice as they focused less on memorisation of factual knowledge during examination preparation. Cheating among peers and internet instability during non-invigilated ROOBE were the concerns highlighted by some students.
CONCLUSIONS: Faculty and students expressed favourable views about ROOBE in promoting higher order cognitive skills. Adequate technological support was essential during ROOBE. While there was a need to address issues related to academic integrity, ROOBE could be included as an authentic assessment within the systems of assessment.
METHODS: Twenty-one students who scored at the 90th percentile in written knowledge-based assessment consented to participate in this study. Each student wrote a guided reflective journal and subsequently attended a semi-structured interview. Students were prompted to explain the rationales for their answers. The data were then analysed using thematic analysis to identify patterns among these students from the SRL perspective. Two coders analysed the data independently and discussed the codes to reach a consensus.
RESULTS: High performing students set goals, made plans, and motivated themselves to achieve the goals. They put consistent efforts into their studies and applied effective learning strategies. They also employed coping mechanisms to deal with challenges. High performing students regularly evaluated their performance and adopted new strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reported that high performing students applied SRL and described the rationales of practice. Medical schools could design SRL-driven interventions to enhance the learning experiences of medical students. Recommendations are made for students on how to apply SRL.
METHODS: Participants attended the workshop and completed pre- (Time 1) and post-workshop (Time 2) questionnaires consisting of validated measures exploring attitudes towards dementia and older people more broadly.
RESULTS: A total of 97 students were recruited. Attitudes towards people with dementia showed significant positive changes between Time 1 and Time 2, whereas no differences were found for attitudes towards older people.
CONCLUSIONS: As medical and pharmacy students develop theoretical knowledge, practical skills and professional attitudes during their undergraduate studies, it is important for students to also learn about the humanistic side of diseases and conditions through workshops such as the one presented here. Further research should now be conducted to consider how Dementia Detectives can be delivered to non-healthcare students and what the barriers and facilitators to wider delivery are.