A comparison of web-based and small-group palliative and end-of-life care curricula: A quasi-randomized controlled study at one institution

Frank C. Day, Malathi Srinivasan, Claudia Der-Martirosian, Erin Griffin, Jerome R. Hoffman, Michael S Wilkes

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose Few studies have compared the effect of Web-based eLearning versus small-group learning on medical student outcomes. Palliative and end-of-life (PEOL) education is ideal for this comparison, given uneven access to PEOL experts and content nationally. Method In 2010, the authors enrolled all third-year medical students at the University of California, Davis School of Medicine into a quasi-randomized controlled trial of Web-based interactive education (eDoctoring) compared with small-group education (Doctoring) on PEOL clinical content over two months. Students participated in three 3-hour PEOL sessions with similar content. Outcomes included a 24-item PEOL-specific self-efficacy scale with three domains (diagnosis/treatment [Cronbach alpha = 0.92; CI: 0.91-0.93], communication/prognosis [alpha = 0.95; CI: 0.93-0.96], and social impact/ self-care [alpha = 0.91; CI: 0.88-0.92]); 8 knowledge items; 10 curricular advantage/disadvantages; and curricular satisfaction (both students and faculty). Results Students were randomly assigned to Web-based eDoctoring (n = 48) or small-group Doctoring (n = 71) curricula. Self-efficacy and knowledge improved equivalently between groups (e.g., prognosis self-efficacy, 19%; knowledge, 10%-42%). Student and faculty ratings of the Web-based eDoctoring curriculum and the small-group Doctoring curriculum were equivalent for most goals, and overall satisfaction was equivalent for each, with a trend toward decreased eDoctoring student satisfaction. Conclusions Findings showed equivalent gains in self-efficacy and knowledge between students participating in a Web-based PEOL curriculum in comparison with students learning similar content in a small-group format. Web-based curricula can standardize content presentation when local teaching expertise is limited, but it may lead to decreased user satisfaction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)331-337
Number of pages7
JournalAcademic Medicine
Volume90
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 4 2015

Fingerprint

Terminal Care
Curriculum
small group
Students
curriculum
Self Efficacy
self-efficacy
student
Medical Students
Education
medical student
Learning
group education
Self Care
Social Change
social effects
learning
education
Teaching
expertise

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Education

Cite this

A comparison of web-based and small-group palliative and end-of-life care curricula : A quasi-randomized controlled study at one institution. / Day, Frank C.; Srinivasan, Malathi; Der-Martirosian, Claudia; Griffin, Erin; Hoffman, Jerome R.; Wilkes, Michael S.

In: Academic Medicine, Vol. 90, No. 3, 04.03.2015, p. 331-337.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{21380f504195497d8b37c9bc7240c8a5,
title = "A comparison of web-based and small-group palliative and end-of-life care curricula: A quasi-randomized controlled study at one institution",
abstract = "Purpose Few studies have compared the effect of Web-based eLearning versus small-group learning on medical student outcomes. Palliative and end-of-life (PEOL) education is ideal for this comparison, given uneven access to PEOL experts and content nationally. Method In 2010, the authors enrolled all third-year medical students at the University of California, Davis School of Medicine into a quasi-randomized controlled trial of Web-based interactive education (eDoctoring) compared with small-group education (Doctoring) on PEOL clinical content over two months. Students participated in three 3-hour PEOL sessions with similar content. Outcomes included a 24-item PEOL-specific self-efficacy scale with three domains (diagnosis/treatment [Cronbach alpha = 0.92; CI: 0.91-0.93], communication/prognosis [alpha = 0.95; CI: 0.93-0.96], and social impact/ self-care [alpha = 0.91; CI: 0.88-0.92]); 8 knowledge items; 10 curricular advantage/disadvantages; and curricular satisfaction (both students and faculty). Results Students were randomly assigned to Web-based eDoctoring (n = 48) or small-group Doctoring (n = 71) curricula. Self-efficacy and knowledge improved equivalently between groups (e.g., prognosis self-efficacy, 19{\%}; knowledge, 10{\%}-42{\%}). Student and faculty ratings of the Web-based eDoctoring curriculum and the small-group Doctoring curriculum were equivalent for most goals, and overall satisfaction was equivalent for each, with a trend toward decreased eDoctoring student satisfaction. Conclusions Findings showed equivalent gains in self-efficacy and knowledge between students participating in a Web-based PEOL curriculum in comparison with students learning similar content in a small-group format. Web-based curricula can standardize content presentation when local teaching expertise is limited, but it may lead to decreased user satisfaction.",
author = "Day, {Frank C.} and Malathi Srinivasan and Claudia Der-Martirosian and Erin Griffin and Hoffman, {Jerome R.} and Wilkes, {Michael S}",
year = "2015",
month = "3",
day = "4",
doi = "10.1097/ACM.0000000000000607",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "90",
pages = "331--337",
journal = "Academic Medicine",
issn = "1040-2446",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of web-based and small-group palliative and end-of-life care curricula

T2 - A quasi-randomized controlled study at one institution

AU - Day, Frank C.

AU - Srinivasan, Malathi

AU - Der-Martirosian, Claudia

AU - Griffin, Erin

AU - Hoffman, Jerome R.

AU - Wilkes, Michael S

PY - 2015/3/4

Y1 - 2015/3/4

N2 - Purpose Few studies have compared the effect of Web-based eLearning versus small-group learning on medical student outcomes. Palliative and end-of-life (PEOL) education is ideal for this comparison, given uneven access to PEOL experts and content nationally. Method In 2010, the authors enrolled all third-year medical students at the University of California, Davis School of Medicine into a quasi-randomized controlled trial of Web-based interactive education (eDoctoring) compared with small-group education (Doctoring) on PEOL clinical content over two months. Students participated in three 3-hour PEOL sessions with similar content. Outcomes included a 24-item PEOL-specific self-efficacy scale with three domains (diagnosis/treatment [Cronbach alpha = 0.92; CI: 0.91-0.93], communication/prognosis [alpha = 0.95; CI: 0.93-0.96], and social impact/ self-care [alpha = 0.91; CI: 0.88-0.92]); 8 knowledge items; 10 curricular advantage/disadvantages; and curricular satisfaction (both students and faculty). Results Students were randomly assigned to Web-based eDoctoring (n = 48) or small-group Doctoring (n = 71) curricula. Self-efficacy and knowledge improved equivalently between groups (e.g., prognosis self-efficacy, 19%; knowledge, 10%-42%). Student and faculty ratings of the Web-based eDoctoring curriculum and the small-group Doctoring curriculum were equivalent for most goals, and overall satisfaction was equivalent for each, with a trend toward decreased eDoctoring student satisfaction. Conclusions Findings showed equivalent gains in self-efficacy and knowledge between students participating in a Web-based PEOL curriculum in comparison with students learning similar content in a small-group format. Web-based curricula can standardize content presentation when local teaching expertise is limited, but it may lead to decreased user satisfaction.

AB - Purpose Few studies have compared the effect of Web-based eLearning versus small-group learning on medical student outcomes. Palliative and end-of-life (PEOL) education is ideal for this comparison, given uneven access to PEOL experts and content nationally. Method In 2010, the authors enrolled all third-year medical students at the University of California, Davis School of Medicine into a quasi-randomized controlled trial of Web-based interactive education (eDoctoring) compared with small-group education (Doctoring) on PEOL clinical content over two months. Students participated in three 3-hour PEOL sessions with similar content. Outcomes included a 24-item PEOL-specific self-efficacy scale with three domains (diagnosis/treatment [Cronbach alpha = 0.92; CI: 0.91-0.93], communication/prognosis [alpha = 0.95; CI: 0.93-0.96], and social impact/ self-care [alpha = 0.91; CI: 0.88-0.92]); 8 knowledge items; 10 curricular advantage/disadvantages; and curricular satisfaction (both students and faculty). Results Students were randomly assigned to Web-based eDoctoring (n = 48) or small-group Doctoring (n = 71) curricula. Self-efficacy and knowledge improved equivalently between groups (e.g., prognosis self-efficacy, 19%; knowledge, 10%-42%). Student and faculty ratings of the Web-based eDoctoring curriculum and the small-group Doctoring curriculum were equivalent for most goals, and overall satisfaction was equivalent for each, with a trend toward decreased eDoctoring student satisfaction. Conclusions Findings showed equivalent gains in self-efficacy and knowledge between students participating in a Web-based PEOL curriculum in comparison with students learning similar content in a small-group format. Web-based curricula can standardize content presentation when local teaching expertise is limited, but it may lead to decreased user satisfaction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84924072338&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84924072338&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000607

DO - 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000607

M3 - Article

C2 - 25539518

AN - SCOPUS:84924072338

VL - 90

SP - 331

EP - 337

JO - Academic Medicine

JF - Academic Medicine

SN - 1040-2446

IS - 3

ER -