The primary aim of this overview was to synthesise results from studies including digital education and its effect on knowledge or learning outcomes, student satisfaction, student enrolment, attendance rate, course completion rate, clinical practice, health outcomes for patients and cost-effectiveness in health-care education. A secondary aim was to report on successful instructional design strategies, and barriers or contextual factors influencing the effectiveness of online learning course delivery in healthcare education.
Method:
We conducted an overview of systematic reviews (SRs) for digital education interventions delivered to health-care students and practitioners.
Results:
We scanned 848 titles, reviewed 247 abstracts and assessed 49 full-text articles against pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. This overview includes data collected from 31,730 participants across 16 SRs. The quality of evidence included in the SRs ranged from very low (n = 2), low (n = 6) to moderate (n = 8). The best available SRs were of moderate quality (7.4 of 11 AMSTAR). SR authors did not report other teaching methods as being superior to digital learning. In most cases (n = 9), digital education when used in addition to traditional methods augmented knowledge acquisition. Other SRs (n = 7) did not show statistically significant differences across interventions including digital education as a replacement, or additive resource to traditional intervention.
Conclusion:
Student enrolment, attendance rates, course completion rates, cost-effectiveness and changes in clinical outcomes for patients are underreported in the existing evidence. Although the quality and quantity of data are limited, evidence-based instructional design for digital education is becoming more possible, especially as educators establish learning activities that track to learning objectives for knowledge acquisition in health care.
Al-JewairTAzarpazhoohASuriSet al. (2009) Computer-assisted learning in orthodontic education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Dental Education73(6): 730–739.
2.
AlyMWillemsGCarelsCet al. (2003) Instructional multimedia programs for self-directed learning in undergraduate and postgraduate training in orthodontics. European Journal of Dental Education7(1): 20–26.
3.
BellDFonarowGHaysRet al. (2000) Self-study from web-based and printed guideline materials: A randomized, controlled trial among resident physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine132(12): 938–946.
4.
BotezatuMHultHForsU (2010) Virtual patient simulation: What do students make of it? A focus group study. BMC Medical Education10: 91.
5.
ClarkRWeekrakoneSRockW (1997) A hypertext tutorial for teaching cephalometrics. British Journal of Orthodontics24(4): 325–328.
6.
ConsortiFMancusoRNocioniMet al. (2012) Efficacy of virtual patients in medical education: A meta-analysis of randomized studies. Computers & Education59(3): 1001–1008.
7.
CookDDuprasDThompsonWet al. (2005) Web-based learning in residents’ continuity clinics: A randomized, controlled trial. Academic Medicine80(1): 90–97.
8.
CookDLevinsonAGarsideS (2010a) Time and learning efficiency in internet-based learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice15(5): 755–770.
9.
CookDLevinsonAGarsideSet al. (2010b) Instructional design variations in internet-based learning for health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Academic Medicine85(5): 909–922.
10.
CurranVFleetL (2005) A review of evaluation outcomes of web-based continuing medical education. Medical Education39(6): 561–567.
11.
DavisDO’BrienMFreemantleNet al. (1999) Impact of formal continuing medical education: Do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes?Journal of the American Medical Association282(9): 867–874.
12.
DeladismaACohenMStevensAet al. (2007) Do medical students respond empathetically to a virtual patient?American Journal of Surgery193(6): 756–760.
13.
DennisJ (2003) Problem-based learning in online vs. face-to-face environments. Education for Health16(2): 198–209.
14.
DuSLiuZLiuSet al. (2013) Web-based distance learning for nurse education: A systematic review. International Nursing Review60(2): 167–177.
15.
DurmazADicleACakanEet al. (2012) Effect of screen-based computer simulation on knowledge and skill in nursing students’ learning of preoperative and postoperative care management: A randomized controlled study. Computers Informatics Nursing30(4): 196–203.
16.
ElgieRSapienRFullertonLet al. (2010) School nurse online emergency preparedness training: An analysis of knowledge, skills, and confidence. The Journal of School Nursing26(5): 368–376.
17.
FengJChangYChangHet al. (2013) Systematic review of effectiveness of situated e-learning on medical and nursing education. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing10(3): 174–183.
18.
FleetwoodJVaughtWFeldmanDet al. (2000) MedEthEx online: A computer-based learning program in medical ethics and communication skills. Teaching and Learning in Medicine12(2): 96–104.
19.
FlemingMOlsenDStathesHet al. (2009) Virtual reality skills training for health care professionals in alcohol screening and brief intervention. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine22(4): 387–398.
20.
FriedlRHöpplerHEcardKet al. (2006a) Comparative evaluation of multimedia driven, interactive, and case-based teaching in heart surgery. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery82(5): 1790–1795.
21.
FriedlRHöpplerHEcardKet al. (2006b) Multimedia-driven teaching significantly improves students’ performance when compared with a print medium. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery81(5): 1760–1766.
22.
GegaLNormanIMarksI (2007) Computer-aided vs. tutor-delivered teaching of exposure therapy for phobia/panic: Randomized controlled trial with pre-registration nursing students. International Journal of Nursing Studies44(3): 397–405.
23.
GeorgePPapachristouNBelisarioJet al. (2014) Online e-learning for undergraduates in health professions: A systematic review of the impact on knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction. Journal of Global Health4(1): 010406.
24.
GordonMChandratilakeMBakerP (2011) Improved junior paediatric prescribing skills after a short e-learning intervention: A randomised controlled trial. Archives of Disease in Childhood96(12): 1191–1194.
25.
GreenSHigginsJAldersonPet al. (2008) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
26.
GrundmanJWigtonRNickolD (2000) A controlled trial of an interactive, web-based virtual reality program for teaching physical diagnosis skills to medical students. Academic Medicine75(10 suppl): S47–S49.
27.
GuyattGOxmanASchünemannHet al. (2011) GRADE guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology64(4): 380–382.
28.
HärkänenMVoutilainenATurunenEet al. (2016) Systematic review and meta-analysis of educational interventions designed to improve medication administration skills and safety of registered nurses. Nurse Education Today41: 36–43.
29.
HoriuchiSYajuYKoyoMet al. (2009) Evaluation of a web-based graduate continuing nursing education program in Japan: A randomized controlled trial. Nurse Education Today29(2): 140–149.
30.
HugenholtzNde CroonESmitsPet al. (2008) Effectiveness of e-learning in continuing medical education for occupational physicians. Occupational Medicine58(5): 370–372.
31.
JayakumarNBrunckhorstODasguptaPet al. (2015) e-Learning in surgical education: A systematic review. Journal of Surgical Education72(6): 1145–1157.
32.
KandasamyTFungK (2009) Interactive Internet-based cases for undergraduate otolaryngology education. Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery140(3): 398–402.
33.
KerfootBBakerHJacksonTet al. (2006) A multi-institutional randomized controlled trial of adjuvant Web-based teaching to medical students. Academic Medicine81(3): 224–230.
34.
KirkpatrickD (1998) Techniques for Evaluating Training Programs. 2nd ed.San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
35.
KumtaSTsangPHungLet al. (2003) Fostering critical thinking skills through a web-based tutorial programme for final year medical students: A randomized controlled study. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia12(3): 267–273.
36.
LahtiMHätönenHVälimäkiM (2014) Impact of e-learning on nurses’ and student nurses knowledge, skills, and satisfaction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Nursing Studies51(1): 136–149.
37.
Lam-AntoniadesMRatnapalanSTaitG (2009) Electronic continuing education in the health professions: An update on evidence from RCTs. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions29(1): 44–51.
38.
LeongSBaldwinCAdelmanA (2003) Integrating web-based computer cases into a required clerkship: Development and evaluation. Academic Medicine78(3): 295–301.
39.
LuMYuSChenIet al. (2013) Nurses’ knowledge of high-alert medications: A randomized controlled trial. Nurse Education Today33(1): 24–30.
40.
McCutcheonKLohanMTraynoMet al. (2015) A systematic review evaluating the impact of online or blended learning vs. face-to-face learning of clinical skills in undergraduate nurse education. Journal of Advanced Nursing71(2): 55–70.
41.
McDonoughMMarksI (2002) Teaching medical students exposure therapy for phobia/panic: Randomized, controlled comparison of face-to-face tutorial in small groups vs. solo computer instruction. Medical Education36(5): 412–417.
42.
MaertensHMadaniALandryTet al. (2016) Systematic review of e-learning for surgical training. The British Journal of Surgery103(11): 1428–1437.
43.
MarinopoulosSDormanTRatanawongsaNet al. (2007) Effectiveness of continuing medical education. Evidence Report Technology Assessment149(149): 1–69.
44.
OxmanA (1994) Checklists for review articles. British Medical Journal309(6955): 648–651.
45.
PaladinoYPeresH (2007) E-learning: A comparative study for knowledge apprehension among nurses. The Revista Latino-American de Enfermagem15(3): 397–403.
46.
RasmussenKBelisarioJWarkPet al. (2014) Offline e-learning for undergraduates in health professions: A systematic review of the impact on knowledge, skills, attitudes and satisfaction. Journal of Global Health4(1): 010405.
47.
RosenbergH (2008) An evaluation of computer-aided learning in orthodontics. Master’s Thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
48.
SantosGLeiteAFigueiredoPet al. (2016) Effectiveness of e-learning in oral radiology education: A systematic review. Journal of Dental Education80(9): 1126–1139.
49.
Schittek JandaMMattheosNNattestadAet al. (2004) Simulation of patient encounters using a virtual patient in periodontology instruction of dental students: Design, usability, and learning effect in history-taking skills. European Journal of Dental Education8(3): 111–119.
50.
SheaBHamelCWellsGet al. (2009) AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology62(10): 1013–1020.
51.
SimonsenBDaehlinGJohanssonIet al. (2014) Improvement of drug dose calculations by classroom teaching or e-learning: A randomised controlled trial in nurses. BMJ Open4(10): e006025.
52.
SinclairPKableALevett-JonesTet al. (2016) The effectiveness of Internet-based e-learning on clinician behaviour and patient outcomes: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies57: 70–81.
53.
SmeekensABroekhuijsen-van HentenDSittigJet al. (2011) Successful e-learning programme on the detection of child abuse in emergency departments: a randomised controlled trial. Archives of Disease in Childhoood96(4): 330–334.
54.
SmitsPde GraafLRadonKet al. (2012) Case-based e-learning to improve the attitude of medical students towards occupational health, a randomised controlled trial. Occupational and Environmental Medicine69(4): 280–283.
55.
SungYKwonIRyuE (2008) Blended learning on medication administration for new nurses: Integration of e-learning and face-to-face instruction in the classroom. Nurse Education Today28(8): 943–952.
56.
TriolaMFeldmanHKaletAet al. (2006) A randomized trial of teaching clinical skills using virtual and live standardized patients. Journal of General Internal Medicine21(5): 424–429.
57.
TruncaliALeeJArkTet al. (2011) Teaching physicians to address unhealthy alcohol use: A randomized controlled trial assessing the effect of a Web-based module on medical student performance. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment40(2): 203–213.
58.
TsaiSChaiSHsiehLet al. (2008) The use of virtual reality computer simulation in learning Port-A cath injection. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice13(1): 71–87.
59.
TsaiSTsaiWChaiSet al. (2004) Evaluation of computer-assisted multimedia instruction in intravenous injection. International Journal of Nursing Studies41(2): 191–198.
60.
VashJYunesianMShariatiMet al. (2007) Virtual patients in undergraduate surgery education: A randomized controlled study. ANZ Journal of Surgery77(1–2): 54–59.
61.
WahlgrenCEdelbringSForsUet al. (2006) Evaluation of an interactive case simulation system in dermatology and venereology for medical students. BMC Medical Education6: 40.
62.
WebbLCloughJO’ReillyDet al. (2017) The utility and impact of information communication technology (ICT) for pre-registration nurse education: A narrative synthesis systematic review. Nurse Education Today48: 160–171.
63.
WenkMWaurickRSchotesDet al. (2009) Simulation-based medical education is no better than problem-based discussions and induces misjudgment in self-assessment. Advances in Health Sciences Education: Theory and Practice14(2): 159–171.
64.
YoungbloodPHarterPSrivastavaSet al. (2008) Design, development, and evaluation of an online virtual emergency department for training trauma teams. Simulation in Healthcare3(3): 146–153.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
