Carpio MEL, Rodríguez CI, Pérez CA, Triana TY, Peña DJA

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 1-13
PDF size: 247.38 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: It is not known how Histology residents accept the inclusion of a videoconferencing system on the microscopic structure of the human body in their self-learning strategy.
Objective: To explore to depth the experience of Histology residents at the Sancti Spíritus University of Medical Sciences who used a videoconferencing system for their professional training.
Methodology: Qualitative study with in-depth interview was conducted with Histology specialists and residents who have used the videoconferencing system at the Sancti Spíritus University of Medical Sciences. The interviews were transcribed, coded and the main topics addressed were selected.
Results: 5 users of the videoconferencing system were interviewed; 5 themes emerged from the interview: 1) How residents insert videoconferences into their self-learning strategy, 2) Preference for videoconferences over textbooks, 3) Successes and failures of videoconferences, 4) What do videoconferences contribute to the training of the resident, advantages and disadvantages?, 5) Suggestions to improve videoconferences.
Conclusions: A videoconferencing system on the microscopic structure of the human body can play a leading role in the learning strategy of Histology residents. The preference shown by residents for videoconferencing over other teaching media may be associated with the ability of multimedia to reduce cognitive load and facilitate learning when Mayer's principles are followed to developing these media. The presence of digital images in these videoconferences was essential to their acceptance.

REFERENCES

1. Wynter L, Burgess A, Kalman E, Heron JE, Bleasel J. Medical students: what educational resources are they using? BMC Med Educ [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2022 Apr 2];19(36). Available from: Available from: https://bmcmededuc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12909-019-1462-9 1.

2. Swinnerton BJ, Morris NP, Hotchkiss S, Pickering JD. The integration of an anatomy massive open online course (MOOC) into a medical anatomy curriculum. Anat Sci Educ [Internet]. 2017 [2022 Jan 25];10(1):53-67. Available from: Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1625 2.

3. Masters K, Ellaway RH, Topps D, Archibald D, Hogue RJ. Mobile technologies in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 105. Med Teach [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2022 Apr 2];38(6):537-49. Available from: Available from: https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2016.1141190 3.

4. Chowdhury TA, Khan H, Druce MR, Drake WM, Rajakariar R, Thuraisingham R, et al. Flipped learning: Turning medical education upside down. Future Healthc J [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2022 Apr 2];6(3):192-195. Available from: Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798025/pdf/futurehealth-6-3-192.pdf 4.

5. Tang B, Coret A, Qureshi A, Barron H, Ayala AP, Law M. Online Lectures in Undergraduate Medical Education: Scoping Review. JMIR Med Educ [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2022 Apr 2];4(1):e11. Available from: Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5915670/ 5.

6. Issa N, Mayer RE, Schuller M, Wang E, Shapiro MB, DaRosa DA. Teaching for understanding in medical classrooms using multimedia design principles. Med Educ [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2022 Jan 25];47(4):388-96. Available from: Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/medu.12127 6.

7. Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care [Internet]. 2007 [cited 2022 Apr 2];19(6):349-57. Available from: Available from: https://academic.oup.com/intqhc/article/19/6/349/1791966?login=true 7.

8. Chowdhury TA, Khan H, Druce MR, Drake WM, Rajakariar R, Thuraisingham R, et al. Flipped learning: Turning medical education upside down. Future Healthc J [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2022 Jan 25];6(3):192-195. Available from: Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6798025/pdf/futurehealth-6-3-192.pdf 8.

9. Law JK, Thome PA, Lindeman B, Jackson DC, Lidor AO. Student use and perceptions of mobile technology in clinical clerkships - Guidance for curriculum design. Am J Surg [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2022 Jan 25];215(1):196-199. Available from: Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002961016304585?via%3Dihub 9.

10. Green BL, Kennedy I, Hassanzadeh H, Sharma S, Frith G, Darling JC. A semi-quantitative and thematic analysis of medical student attitudes towards M-Learning. J Eval Clin Pract [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2022 Jan 25];21(5):925-30. Available from: Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/jep.12400 10.

11. Keis O, Grab C, Schneider A, Öchsner W. Online or face-to-face instruction? A qualitative study on the electrocardiogram course at the University of Ulm to examine students choose a particular format. BMC Med Educ [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2022 Jan 25];17(1). Available from: Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5680799/pdf/12909_2017_Article_1053.pdf 11.

12. Brockfeld T, Müller B, de Laffolie J. Video versus live lecture courses: a comparative evaluation of lecture types and results. MEO [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2022 Apr 2];23(1). Available from: Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2018.1555434 12.

13. Morton CE, Saleh SN, Smith SF, Hemani A, Ameen A, Bennie TD, et al. Blended learning: how can we optimise undergraduate student engagement? BMC Med Educ. 2016 [cited 2022 Apr 2];16. Available from: Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4973547/pdf/12909_2016_Article_716.pdf 13.