Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Electronic learning (e-learning) strategies have been widely adopted by educators worldwide. It is a complex intervention with multiple components and dimensions that may interact differently in different contexts.
Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) e-learning on EBHC competencies in healthcare professionals.
Methods: We considered randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series and controlled before-and-after studies comparing EBHC e-learning or blended learning to no learning, face-to-face, blended or e-learning for healthcare professionals. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, ERIC, SCOPUS, PsychInfo and Web of Knowledge. Two authors independently screened search outputs, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and made risk of bias judgements. We synthesised results narratively due to large amounts of heterogeneity between studies.
Results: After screening 5110 titles and abstracts, we identified 38 potentially eligible studies, 19 of which met our inclusion criteria. Included studies were individually and cluster RCTs and controlled trials. Participants were undergraduate and postgraduate students as well as practicing clinicians. Most studies compared EBHC e-learning to lectures or no learning, some compared blended learning to lectures or no learning. Overall, studies were of moderate quality, but 11 studies had high risk of attrition bias. Knowledge scores improved after e-learning interventions when compared to no learning. Knowledge scores improved in both groups when e-learning was compared to face-to-face interventions, and there was generally no difference in the improvement. One study that compared a clinically integrated e-learning module to a pure online module showed significantly more improvement in knowledge scores with the former.
Conclusion: E-learning of EBHC is effective in increasing EBHC knowledge and skills, but should be integrated into clinical settings for maximum benefit and relevance. Cochrane can draw on our findings to inform learning strategies to increase capacity to access, assess and interpret Cochrane Reviews.
Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of evidence-based healthcare (EBHC) e-learning on EBHC competencies in healthcare professionals.
Methods: We considered randomised and non-randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series and controlled before-and-after studies comparing EBHC e-learning or blended learning to no learning, face-to-face, blended or e-learning for healthcare professionals. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, ERIC, SCOPUS, PsychInfo and Web of Knowledge. Two authors independently screened search outputs, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and made risk of bias judgements. We synthesised results narratively due to large amounts of heterogeneity between studies.
Results: After screening 5110 titles and abstracts, we identified 38 potentially eligible studies, 19 of which met our inclusion criteria. Included studies were individually and cluster RCTs and controlled trials. Participants were undergraduate and postgraduate students as well as practicing clinicians. Most studies compared EBHC e-learning to lectures or no learning, some compared blended learning to lectures or no learning. Overall, studies were of moderate quality, but 11 studies had high risk of attrition bias. Knowledge scores improved after e-learning interventions when compared to no learning. Knowledge scores improved in both groups when e-learning was compared to face-to-face interventions, and there was generally no difference in the improvement. One study that compared a clinically integrated e-learning module to a pure online module showed significantly more improvement in knowledge scores with the former.
Conclusion: E-learning of EBHC is effective in increasing EBHC knowledge and skills, but should be integrated into clinical settings for maximum benefit and relevance. Cochrane can draw on our findings to inform learning strategies to increase capacity to access, assess and interpret Cochrane Reviews.