INTRODUCTION: Learning research methodology is increasingly becoming an essential part of graduate medical education worldwide, with many regulatory and accreditation bodies requiring residents to participate in scholarship. Research methodology workshops have become a standard part of medical curricula; however, there is limited data on how much training on journal selection and the publication process trainees receive. The alarming growth of predatory journals has made it increasingly difficult for researchers, especially trainees and early career physicians, to distinguish these publications from reputable journals. The purpose of this study is to assess the knowledge of reputable and predatory publishing practices amongst medical trainees in an international medical education setting in the United Arab Emirates. METHODS: A survey on credible journal practices based on the 'Think. Check. Submit' initiative was sent to all graduate medical education trainees at two large academic medical centers in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Descriptive statistics were used to tabulate variable frequencies. RESULTS: Over half of the 160 respondents reported receiving prior research methodology training and 42.5% had at least one publication. The majority of the trainees selected impact factor and the quality of the peer-review process as characteristics of reputable journals. Ambiguous editorial board and rapid publication process were recognized as characteristics of predatory journals by >65% of trainees, however, 95% of all trainees were unaware of Beall's list or other resources to help select a journal for publication. 15.2% of trainees who received unsolicited emails from publishers submitted their manuscripts to the unfamiliar journals, citing peer recommendation and pressure to publish from their training programs as reasons. CONCLUSION: Trainees in the United Arab Emirates were mostly unaware of reputable publication practices and are vulnerable to publishing in predatory journals. Policy and educational reform are necessary to maintain the credibility and integrity of the scientific process.
An at first sight seemingly coherent, global medical workforce, with clearly recognizable specialities, subspecialties and primary care doctors, appears at a closer look quite variable. Even within the most progressive countries as to the development of medical education, with educators who regularly meet at conferences and share major journals about medical education, the differences in structures and regulations are big. This contribution focuses on the preparation, admission policy, duration, examinations, and national competency frameworks in postgraduate speciality training in Germany, the USA, Canada, the UK, Australia and the Netherlands. While general objectives for postgraduate training programs have not been very clear, only recently competency-frameworks, created in a limited number of countries, serve harmonize objectives. This process appears to be a challenge and the recent creation of milestones for the reporting on progress of individual trainees (in the US and in Canada in different ways) and the adoption of entrustable professional activities, a most recent concept that is quickly spreading internationally as a framework for teaching and assessing in the clinical workplace is an interesting and hopeful development, but time will tell whether true harmonization across countries will happen.
BACKGROUND: Since the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) in 1955, the applications of AI have increased over the years within a rapidly changing digital landscape where public expectations are on the rise, fed by social media, industry leaders, and medical practitioners. However, there has been little interest in AI in medical education until the last two decades, with only a recent increase in the number of publications and citations in the field. To our knowledge, thus far, a limited number of articles have discussed or reviewed the current use of AI in medical education. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to review the current applications of AI in medical education as well as the challenges of implementing AI in medical education. METHODS: Medline (Ovid), EBSCOhost Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) and Education Source, and Web of Science were searched with explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria. Full text of the selected articles was analyzed using the Extension of Technology Acceptance Model and the Diffusions of Innovations theory. Data were subsequently pooled together and analyzed quantitatively. RESULTS: A total of 37 articles were identified. Three primary uses of AI in medical education were identified: learning support (n=32), assessment of students' learning (n=4), and curriculum review (n=1). The main reasons for use of AI are its ability to provide feedback and a guided learning pathway and to decrease costs. Subgroup analysis revealed that medical undergraduates are the primary target audience for AI use. In addition, 34 articles described the challenges of AI implementation in medical education; two main reasons were identified: difficulty in assessing the effectiveness of AI in medical education and technical challenges while developing AI applications. CONCLUSIONS: The primary use of AI in medical education was for learning support mainly due to its ability to provide individualized feedback. Little emphasis was placed on curriculum review and assessment of students' learning due to the lack of digitalization and sensitive nature of examinations, respectively. Big data manipulation also warrants the need to ensure data integrity. Methodological improvements are required to increase AI adoption by addressing the technical difficulties of creating an AI application and using novel methods to assess the effectiveness of AI. To better integrate AI into the medical profession, measures should be taken to introduce AI into the medical school curriculum for medical professionals to better understand AI algorithms and maximize its use.
Summary Objective: The International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) agreed on revising the existing international recommendations in health informatics /medical informatics education. These should help to establish courses, course tracks or even complete programs in this field, to further develop existing educational activities in the various nations and to support international initiatives concerning education in biomedical and health informatics (BMHI), particularly international activities in educating BMHI specialists and the sharing of courseware. Method: An IMIA task force, nominated in 2006, worked on updating the recommendations’ first version. These updates have been broadly discussed and refined by members of IMIA’s National Member Societies, IMIA’s Academic Institutional Members and by members of IMIA’s Working Group on Health and Medical Informatics Education. Results and Conclusions: The IMIA recommendations center on educational needs for health care professionals to acquire knowledge and skills in information processing and information and communication technology. The educational needs are described as a three-dimensional framework. The dimensions are: 1) professionals in health care (e.g. physicians, nurses, BMHI professionals), 2) type of specialization in BMHI (IT users, BMHI specialists), and 3) stage of career progression (bachelor, master, doctorate). Learning outcomes are defined in terms of knowledge and practical skills for health care professionals in their role a) as IT user and b) as BMHI specialist. Recommendations are given for courses /course tracks in BMHI as part of educational programs in medicine, nursing, health care management, dentistry, pharmacy, public health, health record administration, and informatics /computer science as well as for dedicated programs in BMHI (with bachelor, master or doctor degree). To support education in BMHI, IMIA offers to award a certificate for high-quality BMHI education. It supports information exchange on programs and courses in BMHI through its Working Group on Health and Medical Informatics Education.
BACKGROUND: Educational meetings are widely used for continuing medical education. Previous reviews found that interactive workshops resulted in moderately large improvements in professional practice, whereas didactic sessions did not. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of educational meetings on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: We updated previous searches by searching the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Trials Register and pending file, from 1999 to March 2006. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of educational meetings that reported an objective measure of professional practice or healthcare outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Studies with a low or moderate risk of bias and that reported baseline data were included in the primary analysis. They were weighted according to the number of health professionals participating. For each comparison, we calculated the risk difference (RD) for dichotomous outcomes, adjusted for baseline compliance; and for continuous outcomes the percentage change relative to the control group average after the intervention, adjusted for baseline performance. Professional and patient outcomes were analysed separately. We considered 10 factors to explain heterogeneity of effect estimates using weighted meta-regression supplemented by visual analysis of bubble and box plots. MAIN RESULTS: In updating the review, 49 new studies were identified for inclusion. A total of 81 trials involving more than 11,000 health professionals are now included in the review. Based on 30 trials (36 comparisons), the median adjusted RD in compliance with desired practice was 6% (interquartile range 1.8 to 15.9) when any intervention in which educational meetings were a component was compared to no intervention. Educational meetings alone had similar effects (median adjusted RD 6%, interquartile range 2.9 to 15.3; based on 21 comparisons in 19 trials). For continuous outcomes the median adjusted percentage change relative to control was 10% (interquartile range 8 to 32%; 5 trials). For patient outcomes the median adjusted RD in achievement of treatment goals was 3.0 (interquartile range 0.1 to 4.0; 5 trials). Based on univariate meta-regression analyses of the 36 comparisons with dichotomous outcomes for professional practice, higher attendance at the educational meetings was associated with larger adjusted RDs (P < 0.01); mixed interactive and didactic education meetings (median adjusted RD 13.6) were more effective than either didactic meetings (RD 6.9) or interactive meetings (RD 3.0). Educational meetings did not appear to be effective for complex behaviours (adjusted RD -0.3) compared to less complex behaviours; they appeared to be less effective for less serious outcomes (RD 2.9) than for more serious outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Educational meetings alone or combined with other interventions, can improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes for the patients. The effect is most likely to be small and similar to other types of continuing medical education, such as audit and feedback, and educational outreach visits. Strategies to increase attendance at educational meetings, using mixed interactive and didactic formats, and focusing on outcomes that are likely to be perceived as serious may increase the effectiveness of educational meetings. Educational meetings alone are not likely to be effective for changing complex behaviours.
Sir William Osler organized a journal club at McGill University in 1875, and several authors suggest that journal clubs were found in certain European countries (in particular, Germany and England) prior to that time. The evolution and development of the journal club, however, has not been recorded in the medical literature. Through personal communications and interviews with senior clinicians and historians, I have traced the history of the journal club as an educational modality. In the early 1900s in Germany, journal clubs were routinely found in departments of medicine and medical schools. From 1917-1975, journal clubs evolved into a forum for continuing medical education. Recently, journal clubs have been designed to teach critical appraisal skills to physicians-in-training. Journal clubs are currently found in the fields of medicine, surgery, psychiatry, nursing, pharmacy, obstetrics and gynaecology, paediatrics and geriatric social service. This powerful educational tool has played an active role in medical education for over a century. The journal club should be more formally incorporated into the medical educational curriculum.
Journal of Advances in Medicine and Medical Research aims to publish research papers, reviews and short communications in the areas of medicine and medical research. JAMMR will not only publish traditional full research reports, including short communications, but also this journal will publish reports/articles on all stages of the research process like study protocols, pilot studies and pre-protocols. JAMMR is novelty attracting, open minded, peer-reviewed medical periodical, designed to serve as a perfectly new platform for both mainstream and new ground shaking works as long as they are technically correct and scientifically motivated. The journal also encourages the submission of useful reports of negative results. This is a quality controlled, OPEN peer reviewed, open access INTERNATIONAL journal. Subject matters include studies in clinical areas like immunology, anaesthesia, cardiovascular medicine, complementary medicine, dentistry and oral medicine, pathology, pharmacology and therapeutics, dermatology, respiratory medicine, rheumatology, drugs and medicines, ear, nose and throat/otolaryngology, emergency medicine, infectious diseases, neurology, nutrition and metabolism, obstetrics and gynaecology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, genetics, geriatric medicine, haematology, oncology, ophthalmology, paediatrics, psychiatry, radiology, renal medicine, pharmacognosy, sexual health, urology, epidemiology, ethnic studies, health policy, occupational health, medical education, legal and forensic medicine, environmental medicine and public health, medicine development and safety testing, drug legislation and safety. From 2015, every volume of this journal will consist of 12 issues. Every issue will consist of minimum 5 papers. Each issue will be running issue and all officially accepted manuscripts will be immediately published online. State-of-the-art running issue concept gives authors the benefit of 'Zero Waiting Time' for the officially accepted manuscripts to be published. This journal is an international journal and scope is not confined by boundary of any country or region.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate perceptions of medical students on the role of online teaching in facilitating medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, online national survey. SETTING: May 2020 across 40 UK medical schools. PARTICIPANTS: Medical students across all years from UK-registered medical schools. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The uses, experiences, perceived benefits and barriers of online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: 2721 medical students across 39 medical schools responded. Medical schools adapted to the pandemic in different ways. The changes included the development of new distance-learning platforms on which content was released, remote delivery of lectures using platforms and the use of question banks and other online active recall resources. A significant difference was found between time spent on online platforms before and during COVID-19, with 7.35% students before versus 23.56% students during the pandemic spending >15 hours per week (p<0.05). The greatest perceived benefits of online teaching platforms included their flexibility. Whereas the commonly perceived barriers to using online teaching platforms included family distraction (26.76%) and poor internet connection (21.53%). CONCLUSIONS: Online teaching has enabled the continuation of medical education during these unprecedented times. Moving forward from this pandemic, in order to maximise the benefits of both face-to-face and online teaching and to improve the efficacy of medical education in the future, we suggest medical schools resort to teaching formats such as team-based/problem-based learning. This uses online teaching platforms allowing students to digest information in their own time but also allows students to then constructively discuss this material with peers. It has also been shown to be effective in terms of achieving learning outcomes. Beyond COVID-19, we anticipate further incorporation of online teaching methods within traditional medical education. This may accompany the observed shift in medical practice towards virtual consultations.
This paper aims to draw a picture of current medical education in The Netherlands. Based on strong historical roots in the seventeenth century, Dutch medical education has adapted to changing circumstances through the ages. Nowadays, medical education in The Netherlands may be called "modern", according to international standards and schools such as the one in Maastricht serve as examples, nationally and internationally. After considerable redesign of undergraduate education in the 1980s and 1990s, the first decade of the new century shows a revolutionary development of postgraduate medical education, with the introduction of nationwide competency-based training, and mandatory in-training assessments and portfolios for residents. The high level of activity in medical education development is reflected in high research productivity, measured as Dutch articles in international journals. Despite these strengths, several critical issues around medical education are in debate, ranging from entrance selection, small group tutoring, the two-cycle bachelor-master model and the relevance of basic sciences to the planning of enrolment numbers and working hours for residents. Medical education in The Netherlands is a dynamic field.
BACKGROUND: The application of digital games for training medical professionals is on the rise. So-called 'serious' games form training tools that provide a challenging simulated environment, ideal for future surgical training. Ultimately, serious games are directed at reducing medical error and subsequent healthcare costs. The aim was to review current serious games for training medical professionals and to evaluate the validity testing of such games. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsychInfo and CINAHL were searched using predefined inclusion criteria for available studies up to April 2012. The primary endpoint was validation according to current criteria. RESULTS: A total of 25 articles were identified, describing a total of 30 serious games. The games were divided into two categories: those developed for specific educational purposes (17) and commercial games also useful for developing skills relevant to medical personnel (13). Pooling of data was not performed owing to the heterogeneity of study designs and serious games. Six serious games were identified that had a process of validation. Of these six, three games were developed for team training in critical care and triage, and three were commercially available games applied to train laparoscopic psychomotor skills. None of the serious games had completed a full validation process for the purpose of use. CONCLUSION: Blended and interactive learning by means of serious games may be applied to train both technical and non-technical skills relevant to the surgical field. Games developed or used for this purpose need validation before integration into surgical teaching curricula.
ChatGPT is the world’s most advanced chatbot thus far. Unlike other chatbots, it can create impressive prose within seconds, and it has created much hype and doomsday predictions when it comes to student assessment in higher education and a host of other matters. ChatGPT is a state-of-the-art language model (a variant of OpenAI’s Generative Pretrained Transformer (GPT) language model) designed to generate text that can be indistinguishable from text written by humans. It can engage in conversation with users in a seemingly natural and intuitive way. In this article, we briefly tell the story of OpenAI, the organisation behind ChatGPT. We highlight the fundamental change from a not-for-profit organisation to a commercial business model. In terms of our methods, we conducted an extensive literature review and experimented with this artificial intelligence (AI) software. Our literature review shows our review to be amongst the first peer-reviewed academic journal articles to explore ChatGPT and its relevance for higher education (especially assessment, learning and teaching). After a description of ChatGPT’s functionality and a summary of its strengths and limitations, we focus on the technology’s implications for higher education and discuss what is the future of learning, teaching and assessment in higher education in the context of AI chatbots such as ChatGPT. We position ChatGPT in the context of current Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) research, discuss student-facing, teacher-facing and system-facing applications, and analyse opportunities and threats. We conclude the article with recommendations for students, teachers and higher education institutions. Many of them focus on assessment.
BACKGROUND: In the face of severe faculty shortages in resource-constrained countries, medical schools look to e-learning for improved access to medical education. This paper summarizes the literature on e-learning in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and presents the spectrum of tools and strategies used. METHODS: Researchers reviewed literature using terms related to e-learning and pre-service education of health professionals in LMIC. Search terms were connected using the Boolean Operators "AND" and "OR" to capture all relevant article suggestions. Using standard decision criteria, reviewers narrowed the article suggestions to a final 124 relevant articles. RESULTS: Of the relevant articles found, most referred to e-learning in Brazil (14 articles), India (14), Egypt (10) and South Africa (10). While e-learning has been used by a variety of health workers in LMICs, the majority (58%) reported on physician training, while 24% focused on nursing, pharmacy and dentistry training. Although reasons for investing in e-learning varied, expanded access to education was at the core of e-learning implementation which included providing supplementary tools to support faculty in their teaching, expanding the pool of faculty by connecting to partner and/or community teaching sites, and sharing of digital resources for use by students. E-learning in medical education takes many forms. Blended learning approaches were the most common methodology presented (49 articles) of which computer-assisted learning (CAL) comprised the majority (45 articles). Other approaches included simulations and the use of multimedia software (20 articles), web-based learning (14 articles), and eTutor/eMentor programs (3 articles). Of the 69 articles that evaluated the effectiveness of e-learning tools, 35 studies compared outcomes between e-learning and other approaches, while 34 studies qualitatively analyzed student and faculty attitudes toward e-learning modalities. CONCLUSIONS: E-learning in medical education is a means to an end, rather than the end in itself. Utilizing e-learning can result in greater educational opportunities for students while simultaneously enhancing faculty effectiveness and efficiency. However, this potential of e-learning assumes a certain level of institutional readiness in human and infrastructural resources that is not always present in LMICs. Institutional readiness for e-learning adoption ensures the alignment of new tools to the educational and economic context.
This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Medical education across the world has experienced a major disruptive change as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic and technology has been rapidly and innovatively used to maintain teaching and learning. The future of medical education is uncertain after the pandemic resolves but several potential future scenarios are discussed to inform current decision-making about the future provision of teaching and learning. The use of emergent technology for education, such as artificial intelligence for adaptive learning and virtual reality, are highly likely to be essential components of the transformative change and the future of medical education. The benefits and challenges of the use of technology in medical education are discussed with the intention of informing all providers on how the changes after the pandemic can have a positive impact on both educators and students across the world.
PURPOSE: Consensus group methods, such as the Delphi method and nominal group technique (NGT), are used to synthesize expert opinions when evidence is lacking. Despite their extensive use, these methods are inconsistently applied. Their use in medical education research has not been well studied. The authors set out to describe the use of consensus methods in medical education research and to assess the reporting quality of these methods and results. METHOD: Using scoping review methods, the authors searched the Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, PubMed, Scopus, and ERIC databases for 2009-2016. Full-text articles that focused on medical education and the keywords Delphi, RAND, NGT, or other consensus group methods were included. A standardized extraction form was used to collect article demographic data and features reflecting methodological rigor. RESULTS: Of the articles reviewed, 257 met the inclusion criteria. The Modified Delphi (105/257; 40.8%), Delphi (91/257; 35.4%), and NGT (23/257; 8.9%) methods were most often used. The most common study purpose was curriculum development or reform (68/257; 26.5%), assessment tool development (55/257; 21.4%), and defining competencies (43/257; 16.7%). The reporting quality varied, with 70.0% (180/257) of articles reporting a literature review, 27.2% (70/257) reporting what background information was provided to participants, 66.1% (170/257) describing the number of participants, 40.1% (103/257) reporting if private decisions were collected, 37.7% (97/257) reporting if formal feedback of group ratings was shared, and 43.2% (111/257) defining consensus a priori. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus methods are poorly standardized and inconsistently used in medical education research. Improved criteria for reporting are needed.
Abstract This systematic review provides unique findings with an up-to-date examination of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education (HE) from 2016 to 2022. Using PRISMA principles and protocol, 138 articles were identified for a full examination. Using a priori, and grounded coding, the data from the 138 articles were extracted, analyzed, and coded. The findings of this study show that in 2021 and 2022, publications rose nearly two to three times the number of previous years. With this rapid rise in the number of AIEd HE publications, new trends have emerged. The findings show that research was conducted in six of the seven continents of the world. The trend has shifted from the US to China leading in the number of publications. Another new trend is in the researcher affiliation as prior studies showed a lack of researchers from departments of education. This has now changed to be the most dominant department. Undergraduate students were the most studied students at 72%. Similar to the findings of other studies, language learning was the most common subject domain. This included writing, reading, and vocabulary acquisition. In examination of who the AIEd was intended for 72% of the studies focused on students, 17% instructors, and 11% managers. In answering the overarching question of how AIEd was used in HE, grounded coding was used. Five usage codes emerged from the data: (1) Assessment/Evaluation, (2) Predicting, (3) AI Assistant, (4) Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS), and (5) Managing Student Learning. This systematic review revealed gaps in the literature to be used as a springboard for future researchers, including new tools, such as Chat GPT.
The rapid advancement of computing technologies has facilitated the implementation of AIED (Artificial Intelligence in Education) applications. AIED refers to the use of AI (Artificial Intelligence) technologies or application programs in educational settings to facilitate teaching, learning, or decision making. With the help of AI technologies, which simulate human intelligence to make inferences, judgments, or predictions, computer systems can provide personalized guidance, supports, or feedback to students as well as assisting teachers or policymakers in making decisions. Although AIED has been identified as the primary research focus in the field of computers and education, the interdisciplinary nature of AIED presents a unique challenge for researchers with different disciplinary backgrounds. In this paper, we present the definition and roles of AIED studies from the perspective of educational needs. We propose a framework to show the considerations of implementing AIED in different learning and teaching settings. The structure can help guide researchers with both computers and education backgrounds in conducting AIED studies. We outline 10 potential research topics in AIED that are of particular interest to this journal. Finally, we describe the type of articles we like to solicit and the management of the submissions.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to review the literature on known barriers and solutions that face educators when developing and implementing online learning programs for medical students and postgraduate trainees. METHODS: An integrative review was conducted over a three-month period by an inter-institutional research team. The search included ScienceDirect, Scopus, BioMedical, PubMed, Medline (EBSCO & Ovid), ERIC, LISA, EBSCO, Google Scholar, ProQuest A&I, ProQuest UK & Ireland, UL Institutional Repository (IR), UCDIR and the All Aboard Report. Search terms included online learning, medical educators, development, barriers, solutions and digital literacy. The search was carried out by two reviewers. Titles and abstracts were screened independently and reviewed with inclusion/exclusion criteria. A consensus was drawn on which articles were included. Data appraisal was performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Research Checklist and NHMRC Appraisal Evidence Matrix. Data extraction was completed using the Cochrane Data Extraction Form and a modified extraction tool. RESULTS: Of the 3101 abstracts identified from the search, ten full-text papers met the inclusion criteria. Data extraction was completed on seven papers of high methodological quality and on three lower quality papers. Findings suggest that the key barriers which affect the development and implementation of online learning in medical education include time constraints, poor technical skills, inadequate infrastructure, absence of institutional strategies and support and negative attitudes of all involved. Solutions to these include improved educator skills, incentives and reward for the time involved with development and delivery of online content, improved institutional strategies and support and positive attitude amongst all those involved in the development and delivery of online content. CONCLUSION: This review has identified barriers and solutions amongst medical educators to the implementation of online learning in medical education. Results can be used to inform institutional and educator practice in the development of further online learning.
Quasi-experimental study designs, often described as nonrandomized, pre-post intervention studies, are common in the medical informatics literature. Yet little has been written about the benefits and limitations of the quasi-experimental approach as applied to informatics studies. This paper outlines a relative hierarchy and nomenclature of quasi-experimental study designs that is applicable to medical informatics intervention studies. In addition, the authors performed a systematic review of two medical informatics journals, the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA) and the International Journal of Medical Informatics (IJMI), to determine the number of quasi-experimental studies published and how the studies are classified on the above-mentioned relative hierarchy. They hope that future medical informatics studies will implement higher level quasi-experimental study designs that yield more convincing evidence for causal links between medical informatics interventions and outcomes.
Background: Chronic diseases are currently the main cause of morbidity and mortality and represent a major challenge to healthcare systems. The objective of this study is to know Spanish public opinion about chronic disease and how it affects their daily lives. Methods: Through a telephone or online survey of 24 questions, data was gathered on the characteristics of the respondents and their knowledge and experiences of chronic diseases. Results: Of the 2522 survey respondents, 325 had a chronic disease and were carers, 1088 had a chronic disease and were not carers, 140 did not have a chronic disease but were carers, and 969 did not have chronic disease and were not carers. The degree of knowledge on these diseases was good or very good for 69.4%, 56.0%, 62.2%, and 46.7%, respectively, for each group. All the groups agreed that chronic diseases mainly affect mood, quality of life and having to make sacrifices. Conclusions: Knowledge about chronic diseases is relatively good, although it can be improved among the Spanish population, especially among patients who report having a chronic disease and play the role of carers. However, it is important to continue maintaining the level of information and training concerning these diseases.
Objectives During the COVID-19 pandemic, educators shifted from traditional lectures to videoconferencing. This systematic review explored the use of videoconferencing as a teaching tool in response to the pandemic as well as issues related to digital equity and inclusion. Content The review was conducted using the Joanna Briggs Institute for Systematic Reviews methodology and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement. Summary A total of nine studies met eligibility criteria. The participants in the included studies were medical students from various parts of the world. Technical difficulties and lack of human interactions were identified as barriers to learning through videoconferencing. Outlook To achieve full success, pedagogical videoconferencing must prioritize digital equity and a universal design for learning. Although useful for maintaining education during the pandemic, in the future, videoconferencing will present challenges related to the digital divide as well as opportunities as a teaching tool for nurse educators globally.