» Articles » PMID: 26807049

Evaluating the Appropriateness of Electronic Information Resources for Learning

Overview
Date 2016 Jan 26
PMID 26807049
Citations 7
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Current US medical students have begun to rely on electronic information repositories-such as UpToDate, AccessMedicine, and Wikipedia-for their pre-clerkship medical education. However, it is unclear whether these resources are appropriate for this level of learning due to factors involving information quality, level of evidence, and the requisite knowledgebase. This study evaluated appropriateness of electronic information resources from a novel perspective: amount of mental effort learners invest in interactions with these resources and effects of the experienced mental effort on learning.

Methods: Eighteen first-year medical students read about three unstudied diseases in the above-mentioned resources (a total of fifty-four observations). Their eye movement characteristics (i.e., fixation duration, fixation count, visit duration, and task-evoked pupillary response) were recorded and used as psychophysiological indicators of the experienced mental effort. Post reading, students' learning was assessed with multiple-choice tests. Eye metrics and test results constituted quantitative data analyzed according to the repeated Latin square design. Students' perceptions of interacting with the information resources were also collected. Participants' feedback during semi-structured interviews constituted qualitative data and was reviewed, transcribed, and open coded for emergent themes.

Results: Compared to AccessMedicine and Wikipedia, UpToDate was associated with significantly higher values of eye metrics, suggesting learners experienced higher mental effort. No statistically significant difference between the amount of mental effort and learning outcomes was found. More so, descriptive statistical analysis of the knowledge test scores suggested similar levels of learning regardless of the information resource used.

Conclusions: Judging by the learning outcomes, all three information resources were found appropriate for learning. UpToDate, however, when used alone, may be less appropriate for first-year medical students' learning as it does not fully address their information needs and is more demanding in terms of cognitive resources invested.

Citing Articles

Initial efforts to improve medical student information-seeking behavior with embedded library instruction.

Barr A J Med Libr Assoc. 2023; 111(4):823-828.

PMID: 37928120 PMC: 10621726. DOI: 10.5195/jmla.2023.1771.


Frequency of Student Resource Use and Academic Performance in Preclerkship Education: A Survey Study.

Ikonne U, Brodie A, Bay C, Campbell A Med Sci Educ. 2022; 32(6):1465-1479.

PMID: 36407815 PMC: 9648453. DOI: 10.1007/s40670-022-01674-y.


Wikipedia in Vascular Surgery Medical Education: Comparative Study.

Yacob M, Lotfi S, Tang S, Jetty P JMIR Med Educ. 2020; 6(1):e18076.

PMID: 32417754 PMC: 7334757. DOI: 10.2196/18076.


Students' Experiences of Seeking Web-Based Animal Health Information at the Ontario Veterinary College: Exploratory Qualitative Study.

Lai N, Khosa D, Jones-Bitton A, Dewey C JMIR Med Educ. 2019; 5(2):e13795.

PMID: 31702566 PMC: 6874805. DOI: 10.2196/13795.


Impact of Clinicians' Use of Electronic Knowledge Resources on Clinical and Learning Outcomes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Maggio L, Aakre C, Del Fiol G, Shellum J, Cook D J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21(7):e13315.

PMID: 31359865 PMC: 6690166. DOI: 10.2196/13315.


References
1.
Jacobson J, Dodwell P . Saccadic eye movements during reading. Brain Lang. 1979; 8(3):303-14. DOI: 10.1016/0093-934x(79)90058-0. View

2.
Rayner K, MCCONKIE G . What guides a reader's eye movements?. Vision Res. 1976; 16(8):829-37. DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(76)90143-7. View

3.
POOCK G . Information processing vs pupil diameter. Percept Mot Skills. 1973; 37(3):1000-2. DOI: 10.1177/003151257303700363. View

4.
Peterson M, Rowat J, Kreiter C, Mandel J . Medical students' use of information resources: is the digital age dawning?. Acad Med. 2003; 79(1):89-95. DOI: 10.1097/00001888-200401000-00019. View

5.
Ahmadi S, Faghankhani M, Javanbakht A, Akbarshahi M, Mirghorbani M, Safarnejad B . A comparison of answer retrieval through four evidence-based textbooks (ACP PIER, Essential Evidence Plus, First Consult, and UpToDate): a randomized controlled trial. Med Teach. 2011; 33(9):724-30. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2010.531155. View