• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Education >These may not be the courses you are seeking: a systematic review of open online courses in health professions education
【24h】

These may not be the courses you are seeking: a systematic review of open online courses in health professions education

机译：这些可能不是您要寻找的课程：对卫生专业教育中的在线公开课程的系统评价

获取原文
       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Open Online Courses (OOCs) are increasingly presented as a possible solution to the many challenges of higher education. However, there is currently little evidence available to support decisions around the use of OOCs in health professions education. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the available evidence describing the features of OOCs in health professions education and to analyse their utility for decision-making using a self-developed framework consisting of point scores around effectiveness, learner experiences, feasibility, pedagogy and economics. Electronic searches of PubMed, Medline, Embase, PsychInfo and CINAHL were made up to April 2019 using keywords related to OOC variants and health professions. We accepted any type of full text English publication with no exclusions made on the basis of study quality. Data were extracted using a custom-developed, a priori critical analysis framework comprising themes relating to effectiveness, economics, pedagogy, acceptability and learner experience. 54 articles were included in the review and 46 were of the lowest levels of evidence, and most were offered by institutions based in the United States (n?=?11) and United Kingdom (n?=?6). Most studies provided insufficient course detail to make any confident claims about participant learning, although studies published from 2016 were more likely to include information around course aims and participant evaluation. In terms of the five categories identified for analysis, few studies provided sufficiently robust evidence to be used in formal decision making in undergraduate or postgraduate curricula. This review highlights a poor state of evidence to support or refute claims regarding the effectiveness of OOCs in health professions education. Health professions educators interested in developing courses of this nature should adopt a critical and cautious position regarding their adoption.
机译：开放式在线课程（OOC）越来越多地被提出来解决高等教育的许多挑战。但是，目前几乎没有证据支持在卫生专业教育中使用OOC的决策。本系统综述的目的是总结描述OOC在卫生专业教育中的特征的可用证据，并使用包括围绕有效性，学习者经验，可行性，教学法和实践的得分在内的自行开发的框架来分析OOC在决策中的效用。经济学。截至2019年4月，使用与OOC变体和卫生专业相关的关键字对PubMed，Medline，Embase，PsychInfo和CINAHL进行了电子搜索。我们接受任何类型的全文英语出版物，但不会基于学习质量进行任何排除。使用定制开发的先验关键分析框架提取数据，该框架包括与有效性，经济学，教学法，可接受性和学习者经验有关的主题。该评价纳入了54篇文章，其中46篇是证据水平最低的文章，大多数由美国（n？=？11）和英国（n？=？6）的机构提供。尽管自2016年以来发表的研究更有可能包含有关课程目标和参与者评估的信息，但大多数研究提供的课程细节不足，无法对参与者的学习做出任何自信的主张。就确定要分析的五个类别而言，很少有研究提供足够有力的证据用于本科或研究生课程的正式决策。这篇评论强调了证据不足，无法支持或驳斥有关OOC在卫生专业教育中的有效性的主张。对开发此类课程感兴趣的卫生专业教育者，在采用这些课程时应采取批判和谨慎的立场。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号