Nilaad Sedtavut D, Lin Erica, Bailey Jacob, Truong Caitlyn, Gaboyan Samvel, Mittal Ankita, Best Brookie M, Guluma Kama, Iglewicz Alana, Lander Lina, Evans Sean, Goldberg Charles, Crotty Alexander Laura E
Department of Medicine.
Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences.
ATS Sch. 2022 Aug 31;3(3):399-412. doi: 10.34197/ats-scholar.2022-0001OC. eCollection 2022 Oct.
The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been a source of disruption, changing the face of medical education. In response to infection control measures at the University of California, San Diego, the hybrid in-person and recorded preclerkship curriculum was converted to a completely virtual format. The impact of this exclusive virtual teaching platform on the quality of trainee education is unknown.
To determine the efficacy of a virtual course, relative to traditional hybrid in-person and recorded teaching, and to assess the impact of supplementary educational material on knowledge acquisition.
A retrospective observational cohort study was performed to assess an introductory course, held mostly in person in 2019 versus completely virtual in 2020, for first-year medical students and second-year pharmacy students at the University of California, San Diego, School of Medicine and Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences.
The midterm and final examination scores were similar for the hybrid and virtual courses. There was no association between the hours of recorded lectures watched and final examination scores for either course. In the 2019 in-person and recorded course, students who demonstrated consistent on-time use of practice quizzes scored statistically higher on the final examination ( = 0.0066). In the 2020 virtual course, students who downloaded quizzes regularly had statistically higher scores on the midterm examination ( < 0.0001).
The similar examination scores for the hybrid in-person and recorded and exclusively virtual courses suggest that the short-term knowledge acquired was equivalent, independent of the modality with which the content was delivered. Consistent on-time use of practice quizzes was associated with higher examination scores. Future studies are needed to assess the difference between a completely in-person versus virtual curriculum.
冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行造成了混乱,改变了医学教育的面貌。为响应加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校的感染控制措施,混合式面授和录制的临床前课程被转换为完全虚拟的形式。这种独家虚拟教学平台对学员教育质量的影响尚不清楚。
确定虚拟课程相对于传统混合式面授和录制教学的效果,并评估补充教育材料对知识获取的影响。
进行了一项回顾性观察队列研究,以评估2019年主要面授的入门课程与2020年完全虚拟的入门课程,对象为加利福尼亚大学圣地亚哥分校医学院和斯卡格斯药学院及制药科学学院的一年级医学生和二年级药学学生。
混合课程和虚拟课程的期中考试和期末考试成绩相似。两门课程中观看录制讲座的时长与期末考试成绩之间均无关联。在2019年的面授和录制课程中,持续按时使用练习测验的学生在期末考试中的得分在统计学上更高(P = 0.0066)。在2020年的虚拟课程中,定期下载测验的学生在期中考试中的得分在统计学上更高(P < 0.0001)。
混合式面授和录制课程与完全虚拟课程的相似考试成绩表明,所获得的短期知识是等效的,与内容的授课方式无关。持续按时使用练习测验与更高的考试成绩相关。需要进一步的研究来评估完全面授课程与虚拟课程之间的差异。