Suppr超能文献

在线学习能否成为疫情期间护生学习的可靠替代方式?——系统评价和荟萃分析。

Can online learning be a reliable alternative to nursing students' learning during a pandemic? - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

545, Seobu-ro, Uijeongbu-si, Gyeonggi-do, Kyungmin University, Republic of Korea.

303 Cheonjam-ro, Wansan-gu, Jeonju-si 55069, Jeonju University, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Nurse Educ Today. 2023 Mar;122:105710. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105710. Epub 2023 Jan 19.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare online learning with traditional face-to-face and blended learning, based on randomized controlled trials, to determine the impact of online learning on nursing students' learning outcomes.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search was conducted via English (PubMed, ERIC, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL) and Korean databases (RISS, DBpia, and KISS).

REVIEW METHODS

Studies published up to the first week of April 2022 were reviewed with a focus on the participants, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design format. Following a primary screening of titles and abstracts, and secondary screening of full texts, 10 randomized controlled trial studies were selected, of which eight were included in the meta-analysis. Two researchers independently reviewed the literature, and the final selection was made in consensus.

RESULTS

Online learning had a statistically significant positive effect on nursing students' knowledge, compared with no educational intervention (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.63; 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.31 to 1.95). However, there was no significant difference in the impact of online learning on knowledge compared with blended learning (SMD = -0.14; 95 % CI: -0.70 to 0.41) and face-to-face learning (SMD = 0.37; 95 % CI: -0.32 to 1.06). Furthermore, compared with blended learning (SMD = -0.18; 95 % CI: -0.43 to 0.06) and face-to-face learning (SMD = 0.05; 95 % CI: -0.31 to 0.41), there was no significant difference in the impact of online learning on attitudes toward learning.

CONCLUSIONS

Online learning in nursing education is not significantly different from blended or face-to-face learning in terms of its impact on knowledge acquisition and attitudes toward learning. The results of this review and meta-analysis highlight the need for selective application of learning methods, taking into account learning environments as well as curricular subjects and topics.

摘要

目的

基于随机对照试验,比较在线学习与传统面授学习和混合学习,以确定在线学习对护理学生学习成果的影响。

设计

系统综述和荟萃分析。

资料来源

通过英语(PubMed、ERIC、Embase、CENTRAL 和 CINAHL)和韩语数据库(RISS、DBpia 和 KISS)进行系统检索。

检索方法

综述截至 2022 年 4 月第一周发表的研究,重点关注参与者、干预、比较、结果和研究设计格式。经过标题和摘要的初步筛选以及全文的二次筛选,选择了 10 项随机对照试验研究,其中 8 项纳入荟萃分析。两名研究人员独立审查文献,最终达成共识进行选择。

结果

与无教育干预相比,在线学习对护理学生的知识有统计学上的显著积极影响(标准化均数差(SMD)= 1.63;95%置信区间(CI):1.31 至 1.95)。然而,与混合学习(SMD = -0.14;95%CI:-0.70 至 0.41)和面对面学习(SMD = 0.37;95%CI:-0.32 至 1.06)相比,在线学习对知识的影响没有显著差异。此外,与混合学习(SMD = -0.18;95%CI:-0.43 至 0.06)和面对面学习(SMD = 0.05;95%CI:-0.31 至 0.41)相比,在线学习对学习态度的影响也没有显著差异。

结论

在获取知识和学习态度方面,护理教育中的在线学习与混合学习或面对面学习没有显著差异。本综述和荟萃分析的结果强调了有针对性地应用学习方法的必要性,要考虑学习环境以及课程科目和主题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验