Benefits and limitations of the transfer online of Irish College of General Practitioners continuing medical education small group learning during the COVID pandemic: a national Delphi study.

IF 3.1 2区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Medical Education Online Pub Date : 2024-12-31 Epub Date: 2024-09-08 DOI:10.1080/10872981.2024.2396163
Stephanie Dowling, Finola Minihan, Ilona Duffy, Claire McNicholas, Gillian Doran, Pat Harrold, John Burke, Walter Cullen
{"title":"Benefits and limitations of the transfer online of Irish College of General Practitioners continuing medical education small group learning during the COVID pandemic: a national Delphi study.","authors":"Stephanie Dowling, Finola Minihan, Ilona Duffy, Claire McNicholas, Gillian Doran, Pat Harrold, John Burke, Walter Cullen","doi":"10.1080/10872981.2024.2396163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In Ireland and internationally, small-group learning (SGL) has been shown to be an effective way of delivering continuing medical education (CME) and changing clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Research question: </strong>This study sought to determine the benefits and limitations, as reported by Irish GPs, of the change of CME-SGL from face-to-face to online learning during COVID.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>GPs were invited to participate via email through their respective CME tutors. The first of three rounds of a survey using the Delphi method gathered demographic information and asked GPs about the benefits and/or limitations of learning online in their established small groups. Subsequent rounds obtained a consensus opinion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-eight GPs across Ireland agreed to participate. Response rates varied from 62.5% to 72% in different rounds. These GPs reported that attending their established CME-SGL groups allowed them to discuss the practical implications of applying guidelines in COVID care into practice (92.7% consensus), reviewing new local services and comparing their practice with others (94% consensus); helping them feel less isolated (98% consensus). They reported that online meetings were less social (60% consensus), and informal learning that occurs before and after meetings did not take place (70% consensus). GPs would not like online learning to replace face-to face-CME-SGL after COVID (89% consensus).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>GPs in established CME-SGL groups benefited from online learning as they could discuss how to adapt to rapidly changing guidelines while feeling supported and less isolated. They report that face-to-face meetings offer more opportunities for informal learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":47656,"journal":{"name":"Medical Education Online","volume":"29 1","pages":"2396163"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11382731/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Education Online","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2024.2396163","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In Ireland and internationally, small-group learning (SGL) has been shown to be an effective way of delivering continuing medical education (CME) and changing clinical practice.

Research question: This study sought to determine the benefits and limitations, as reported by Irish GPs, of the change of CME-SGL from face-to-face to online learning during COVID.

Methods: GPs were invited to participate via email through their respective CME tutors. The first of three rounds of a survey using the Delphi method gathered demographic information and asked GPs about the benefits and/or limitations of learning online in their established small groups. Subsequent rounds obtained a consensus opinion.

Results: Eighty-eight GPs across Ireland agreed to participate. Response rates varied from 62.5% to 72% in different rounds. These GPs reported that attending their established CME-SGL groups allowed them to discuss the practical implications of applying guidelines in COVID care into practice (92.7% consensus), reviewing new local services and comparing their practice with others (94% consensus); helping them feel less isolated (98% consensus). They reported that online meetings were less social (60% consensus), and informal learning that occurs before and after meetings did not take place (70% consensus). GPs would not like online learning to replace face-to face-CME-SGL after COVID (89% consensus).

Conclusion: GPs in established CME-SGL groups benefited from online learning as they could discuss how to adapt to rapidly changing guidelines while feeling supported and less isolated. They report that face-to-face meetings offer more opportunities for informal learning.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在 COVID 大流行期间将爱尔兰全科医师学院继续医学教育小组学习转移到网上的好处和局限性:一项全国性德尔菲研究。
背景:在爱尔兰和国际上,小组学习(SGL)已被证明是提供继续医学教育(CME)和改变临床实践的有效方式:本研究旨在根据爱尔兰全科医生的报告,确定在 COVID 期间将 CME-SGL 从面对面学习改为在线学习的益处和局限性:全科医生通过各自的继续医学教育导师以电子邮件的方式应邀参加。采用德尔菲法进行了三轮调查,第一轮调查收集了人口统计信息,并询问了全科医生在其既定小组中进行在线学习的益处和/或局限性。随后的几轮调查获得了一致意见:结果:爱尔兰共有 88 名全科医生同意参与调查。不同轮次的回复率从 62.5% 到 72% 不等。这些全科医生表示,参加他们已建立的 CME-SGL 小组可以让他们讨论将 COVID 护理指南应用到实践中的实际影响(92.7% 的共识),回顾新的本地服务并将他们的实践与他人进行比较(94% 的共识);帮助他们减少孤独感(98% 的共识)。他们报告说,在线会议的社交性较差(60%的共识),会议前后的非正式学习没有进行(70%的共识)。在 COVID 之后,全科医生不希望在线学习取代面对面的 CME-SGL(89% 的共识):已建立的 CME-SGL 小组中的全科医生从在线学习中获益,因为他们可以讨论如何适应快速变化的指南,同时感受到支持和较少的孤立感。他们表示,面对面的会议为非正式学习提供了更多机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Medical Education Online
Medical Education Online EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
2.20%
发文量
97
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Medical Education Online is an open access journal of health care education, publishing peer-reviewed research, perspectives, reviews, and early documentation of new ideas and trends. Medical Education Online aims to disseminate information on the education and training of physicians and other health care professionals. Manuscripts may address any aspect of health care education and training, including, but not limited to: -Basic science education -Clinical science education -Residency education -Learning theory -Problem-based learning (PBL) -Curriculum development -Research design and statistics -Measurement and evaluation -Faculty development -Informatics/web
期刊最新文献
Medical law; promotion of medicine curriculum: a letter to editor. Tips for developing a coaching program in medical education. High- and low-achieving international medical students' perceptions of the factors influencing their academic performance at Chinese universities. A Medical Education Research Library: key research topics and associated experts. Financial barriers and inequity in medical education in India: challenges to training a diverse and representative healthcare workforce.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1