Cited by 2,240Innovations in Medical EducationEducational Technology and E-LearningOnline and Blended Learning

The Impact of E-Learning in Medical Education

Ruiz, Jorge G., Mintzer, Michael J., Leipzig, Rosanne M.·2006·Academic Medicine

Abstract

The authors provide an introduction to e-learning and its role in medical education by outlining key terms, the components of e-learning, the evidence for its effectiveness, faculty development needs for implementation, evaluation strategies for e-learning and its technology, and how e-learning might be considered evidence of academic scholarship. E-learning is the use of Internet technologies to enhance knowledge and performance. E-learning technologies offer learners control over content, learning sequence, pace of learning, time, and often media, allowing them to tailor their experiences to meet their personal learning objectives. In diverse medical education contexts, e-learning appears to be at least as effective as traditional instructor-led methods such as lectures. Students do not see e-learning as replacing traditional instructor-led training but as a complement to it, forming part of a blended-learning strategy. A developing infrastructure to support e-learning within medical education includes repositories, or digital libraries, to manage access to e-learning materials, consensus on technical standardization, and methods for peer review of these resources. E-learning presents numerous research opportunities for faculty, along with continuing challenges for documenting scholarship. Innovations in e-learning technologies point toward a revolution in education, allowing learning to be individualized (adaptive learning), enhancing learners' interactions with others (collaborative learning), and transforming the role of the teacher. The integration of e-learning into medical education can catalyze the shift toward applying adult learning theory, where educators will no longer serve mainly as the distributors of content, but will become more involved as facilitators of learning and assessors of competency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00001888-200603000-00002

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ruiz, J. G., Mintzer, M. J., & Leipzig, R. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Miami (US)
  • Miami VA Healthcare System (US)
Corresponding author
Ruiz, Jorge G.
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2006-03
Volume
81
Issue
3
Pages
207-212
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2145239266
Cited by
2,240
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 50 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 114 · 2023: 125 · 2022: 198 · 2021: 225 · 2020: 176 · 2019: 124 · 2018: 124 · 2017: 109 · 2016: 114 · 2015: 112 · 2014: 117 · 2013: 136 · 2012: 117
FWCI
7.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Defense
  • Florida Agency for Health Care Administration
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and E-Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
Keywords
online learning, medical education, blended learning, faculty development, e-learning evaluation, digital libraries, adaptive learning, cooperative learning, andragogy, e-learning effectiveness
MeSH terms
Competency-Based Education, Curriculum, Education, Medical, Humans, Knowledge, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review