Cogprints

Enhanced Web-Based Otitis Study Case vs Simple Paper-Case: Impact on Medical Student Objec-tive Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) Performance

Malloy M.D.,M.S., Michael H. (2002) Enhanced Web-Based Otitis Study Case vs Simple Paper-Case: Impact on Medical Student Objec-tive Structured Clinical Exam (OSCE) Performance. [Journal (On-line/Unpaginated)]

Full text available as:

[img]
Preview
PDF
299Kb

Abstract

Background: Distance education methods have taken on greater importance as medical student education has moved off campus into the community. What the best methods are for conveying information to students at distant sites has not been determined. Objective: To determine if students at distant community sites who received an otitis media study case by e-mail that was enhanced with a referral to a web-based otitis study case, performed better on otitis OSCE stations than students who received the same case not enhanced with visuals or referrals to a web-based otitis case. Design/Methods: Students were randomized by community site to receive either the enhanced (E) or simple otitis study case (S). Students were e-mailed an otitis media study case during the 5th week of the rotation. Those randomized to the E-case received a case that started with a case scenario followed by a "Task" that instructed them to go to this web address: http://www.aap.org/otitismedia/www/vc/ear/index.cfm (American Academy of Pediatrics Otitis Web Site). They were then to select "Case 1" which was a continuation of the case scenario present on their e-mail. A list of learning objectives was also printed on the e-mail. Students receiving the S-case viewed the same case scenario and objectives, but were not instructed to go to the web page. All students rotated through two OSCE otitis stations. In the first station they interviewed a simulated patient(OSCE-SP) and counseled her on the management of her 12 month old with otitis. Within that station they viewed a video of a pneumoscopic exam of two ears, one ear with otitis and the other ear normal. At the 2nd otitis station the student presented the case to a faculty and was asked a series of questions about otitis media(OSCE-PR). Scores on the two stations were compared by group. Results: There were 198 students who took the OSCE. 178 (90%) responded to a survey that indicated they had opened and read the e-mailed case. There were 87 students in the E-group and 91 in the S-group. The mean ±s.d. OSCE-SP station score for the E-group was 72.6 ±12.0 vs 75.4 ±9.8 for the S-group, p=0.09. For the otitis presentation station the scores for the E-group and S-group were respectively, 82.9 ±9.6 and 83.7 ±9.4, p=0.55. Conclusions: These data suggest that enhanced visual distance education cases may offer no distinct advantage over simple paper-type case study guides

Item Type:Journal (On-line/Unpaginated)
Keywords:medical education; health professional education; peer-reviewed; Informatics/Web; Community-based; Distance education
Subjects:JOURNALS > Medical Education Online > MEO Peer Reviewed
ID Code:2375
Deposited By:David, Solomon
Deposited On:08 Aug 2002
Last Modified:11 Mar 2011 08:54

References in Article

Select the SEEK icon to attempt to find the referenced article. If it does not appear to be in cogprints you will be forwarded to the paracite service. Poorly formated references will probably not work.

1. Malloy MH and Speer A. A comparison of performance between third-year students completing a pediatric ambulatory rotation on campus vs in the community. Arch Pediatr Adolesc med 1998;152:397-401.

2. Maulitz RC, Ohles JA, Schnuth RL, Lipsky MS, and Grealish RJ. The CyberDoc Project: using portable computing to enhance a community-based primary care clerkship. Acad Med 1996;71:1325-1328.

3. Ivanovic B, Koethe S, and Drogull S. Computer applications in medical education. Acad Med 1997;72:415-416.

4. Mehta MP, Sinha P, Kanwar K, Inman A, Albanese M, Fahl W. Evaluation of internet-based oncologic teaching for medical students. J Cancer Educ 1998;13:197-202.

5. McNulty JA, Halama J, Dauzvardis MF, and Espiritu B. Evaluation of web-based computer-aided instruc-tion in a basic science course. Acad Med 2000;75:59-65

6. Rawn C, Davidon R, and Meier A. Using webbased case presentations to supplement a surgery clerkship curriculum. Acad Med 2000;75:540.

7. Friedman RB. Top ten reasons the world wide web may fail to change medical education. Acad Med 1996;71:979-981.

8. Dillon A and Gabbard R. Hypermedia as an educational technology: a review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Review of Educational Research 1998;68:322-349.

9. Lyon HC, Healy JC, Bell JR, O'Donnell JF, Shultz EK, Moore-West M, Wigton RS, Hirai F, and Beck JR. PlanAlyzer, an interactive computer-assisted program to teach clinical problem solving in diagnosing ane-mia and coronary artery disease. Acad Med 1992;67:821-828.

10. Moberg TF and Whitcomb ME. Educational technology to facilitate medical students' learning: back-ground paper 2 of the medical school objectives project. Acad Med 1999;74:1145-1150.

11. Bacro TRH, Murphy JC, and Reeves BA. Integration of an internet anatomy review of the knee joint in a rehabilitation sciences curriculum. J Allied Health 1997;26:159-162.

12. Papa FJ and Meyer S. A compter-assisted learning tool designed to improve clinical problem-solving skills. Ann Emerg Med 1989;18:269-273.

13. Grimes A. The hope and the reality. Wall Street Journal, March 12,2001. p R6.

14. Bransten L. Something ventured: where the big-money investors are placing their bets. Wall Street Journal, March 12, 2001. p R8.

Metadata

Repository Staff Only: item control page