Forfattere: Koohestani HR, Arabshahi SKS, Fata L, Ahmadi F

År: 2018

Kilde: Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism, 6(2):58–69

Sammendrag:

Introduction: The demand for mobile learning in the medical sciences educational program is increasing. The present reviewstudy gathers evidence highlighted by the experimental studies on the educational effects of mobile learning for medical sciences students. 

Methods: The study was carried out as a systematic literature search published from 2007 to July 2017 in the databases PubMed/Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Knowledge (Thomson Reuters), Educational Resources and Information Center (ERIC), EMBASE (Elsevier),Cochrane library, PsycINFO and Google Scholar. To examine quality of the articles, a tool validated by the BEME Review was employed. 

Results: Totally, 21 papers entered the study. Three main themes emerged from the content of papers: (1) improvement in student clinical competency and confidence, (2) acquisition and enhancing of students’ theoretical knowledge, and (3) students’ positive attitudes to and perception of mobile learning. Level 2B of Kirkpatrick hierarchy had been examined by all the papers and seven of them had reported two or more outcome levels, but level 4 was not reported in the papers.  

Conclusion: Our review showed that the students of medical sciences had positive response and attitudes to mobile learning. Moreover, implementation of mobile learning in medical sciences program might lead to valuable educational benefits and improve clinical competence and confidence along with theoretical knowledge, attitudes, and perception of mobile learning. The results indicated that mobile learning strategy in medical education can positively affect learning in all three domains of Bloom’s Taxonomy. 

DOI / Lenke: http://dx.doi.org/10.30476/jamp.2018.41013

Metodisk kvalitetsvurdering:

Denne systematiske oversikten er utarbeidet på en god måte og forfatterne har vært tydelig på metoden de har brukt for å utarbeide oversikten. Inklusjons- og eksklusjonskriterier er tydelig definert og vist i en tabell, en figur dokumentere de ulike fasene i prosessen og det er foretatt en kvalitetsvurdering av de inkluderte studiene. Kvalitetsvurderingen førte ikke til at noen av studiene ble utelatt. De har kun inkludert randomisert kontrollerte studier og studier med kvasi-eksperimentelt design. Det er imidlertid ikke gjennomført metaanalyser på grunn av studienes heterogenitet.