The use of collaborative writing applications in healthcare education - a scoping review

Article type
Authors
van de Belt T1, Grajales F2, Faber M1, Kuziemsky C3, Gagnon S4, Bilodeau A5, Rioux S6, Fournier C6, Emond M6, Nadeau C4, Lalonde TM4, Aubin K6, Gold I7, Gagnon M8, Turgeon A1, Heldoorn M9, Poitras J4, Eysenbach G10, Kremer J1, Légaré F10, Archambault PM4
1Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, The Netherlands
2Advisor on Health Information and Communication Technology to the Surgeon General of the Republic of Slovenia
3Telfer School of Management, University of Ottawa, Canada
4Centre de santé et de services sociaux Alphonse-Desjardins (CHAU de Lévis), Lévis, Canada
5Institut national de santé publique du Québec, Québec, Canada
6Faculté de médecine, Université Laval, Québec, Canada
7Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
8Faculté des sciences infirmières, Université Laval, Québec, Canada
9Federation of Patients and Consumer Organisations in the Netherlands
10Centre de recherche du Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec (CRCHUQ), Québec, Canada
Abstract
Background: Collaborative writing applications (CWAs) (e.g., wikis, Google Docs) offer interesting possibilities for healthcare education. There is a need to systematically synthesize the growing evidence concerning their impact on healthcare education.

Objectives: To assess the depth and breadth of the literature studying the impact of CWAs in healthcare education. We aimed to discover the type of CWAs studied, the educational setting of their use and the educational impact on the learner.

Methods: This review is part of a larger scoping review exploring the use of CWA in healthcare that systematically searched the literature in medical and education databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsychInfo, Eric and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses) from 2001 to 2011 with the following search terms: ‘wiki’, ‘wikis’, ‘web 2.0’, ‘social media’, ‘Google Knol’, ‘Google Docs’ and ‘collaborative writing applications’. CWAs were defined as any technology enabling joint and simultaneous editing of online documents by many end users. We included papers presenting qualitative or quantitative empirical evidence concerning CWA use in healthcare education. Articles were excluded if they only discussed blogs, forums or learning communities. Two reviewers independently reviewed citations, selected studies and extracted data using a standardized form.

Results: Figure 1 presents our flow chart. Out of 110 articles whose full text was reviewed, we found 2 experimental and 2 quasi-experimental studies. Characteristics of these studies are detailed in Table 1. One experimental study yielded positive results about using Google Docs to teach scientific writing. The other experimental study demonstrated that a wiki-facilitated problem-based learning course improved student communication skills and satisfaction, but decreased diagnostic skills.

Conclusions: A formal systematic review is further needed to critically appraise the quality of these papers and synthesize their results. This will help inform the design of future trials exploring the use of CWAs for teaching in the healthcare field.