Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
BMC Med Educ. 2024 Aug 16;24(1):882. doi: 10.1186/s12909-024-05877-2.
Despite the central role of mixed methods in health research, studies evaluating online methods training in the health sciences are nonexistent. The focused goal was to evaluate online training by comparing the self-rated skills of scholars who experienced an in-person retreat to scholars in an online retreat in specific domains of mixed methods research for the health sciences from 2015-2023.
The authors administered a scholar Mixed Methods Skills Self-Assessment instrument based on an educational competency scale that included domains on: "research questions," "design/approach," "sampling," "analysis," and "dissemination" to participants of the Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences (MMRTP). Self-ratings on confidence on domains were compared before and after retreat participation within cohorts who attended in person (n = 73) or online (n = 57) as well as comparing across in-person to online cohorts. Responses to open-ended questions about experiences with the retreat were analyzed.
Scholars in an interactive program to improve mixed methods skills reported significantly increased confidence in ability to define or explain concepts and in ability to apply the concepts to practical problems, whether the program was attended in-person or synchronously online. Scholars in the online retreat had self-rated skill improvements as good or better than scholars who participated in person. With the possible exception of networking, scholars found the online format was associated with advantages such as accessibility and reduced burden of travel and finding childcare. No differences in difficulty of learning concepts was described.
Keeping in mind that the retreat is only one component of the MMRTP, this study provides evidence that mixed methods training online was associated with the same increases in self-rated skills as persons attending online and can be a key component to increasing the capacity for mixed methods research in the health sciences.
尽管混合方法在健康研究中起着核心作用，但评估健康科学中在线方法培训的研究尚不存在。本研究的重点目标是通过比较 2015 年至 2023 年期间在特定混合方法研究领域经历过面对面静修和在线静修的学者自我评估的技能，来评估在线培训。
作者根据教育能力量表，向健康科学混合方法研究培训计划 (MMRTP) 的参与者发放了学者混合方法技能自我评估工具，该量表包括“研究问题”、“设计/方法”、“抽样”、“分析”和“传播”等领域。在面对面（n=73）或在线（n=57）参加静修的队列内，以及在面对面和在线队列之间进行比较，比较了参与者在参加静修前后在各领域的自我评估信心。对有关静修体验的开放性问题的回答进行了分析。
参加提高混合方法技能的互动计划的学者报告称，无论他们是参加面对面还是同步在线课程，他们在定义或解释概念的能力以及将概念应用于实际问题的能力方面的信心都显著增强。在线静修的学者自我评估的技能提高与亲自参加的学者一样好或更好。除了网络联系之外，学者们发现在线格式具有易于访问、减少旅行和寻找儿童保育的负担等优势。没有描述学习概念的难度差异。
考虑到静修只是 MMRTP 的一个组成部分，本研究提供的证据表明，在线混合方法培训与亲自参加的人员自我评估技能的提高有关，并且可以成为增加健康科学中混合方法研究能力的关键组成部分。
