The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Computer assisted learning in undergraduate medical education
Open accessAbstract
It is becoming “a truth universally acknowledged” that the education of undergraduate medical students will be enhanced through the use of computer assisted learning. Access to the wide range of online options illustrated in the figure must surely make learning more exciting, effective, and likely to be retained. This assumption is potentially but by no means inevitably correct. ### Box 1: Why fund computer assisted learning? Computer assisted learning is inevitable —Individual lecturers and departments are already beginning to introduce a wide range of computer based applications, sometimes in a haphazard way. Planned and coordinated development is better than indiscriminate expansion It is convenient and flexible —Courses supported by computer assisted learning applications may require fewer face to face lectures and seminars and place fewer geographical and temporal constraints on staff and students. Students at peripheral hospitals or primary care centres may benefit in particular Unique presentational benefits —Computer presentation is particularly suited to subjects that are visually intensive, detail oriented, and difficult to conceptualise, such as complex biochemical processes or microscopic images.1 Furthermore, “virtual” cases may reduce the need to use animal or human tissue in learning Personalised learning —Each learner can progress at his or her preferred pace. They can repeat, interrupt, and resume at will, which may have particular advantages for weaker students Economies of scale —Once an application has been set up, the incremental cost of offering it to additional students is relatively small Competitive advantage —Potential applicants may use the quality of information technology to discriminate between medical schools. A “leading edge” virtual campus is likely to attract good students Achieves the ultimate goal of higher education —The goal is to link people into learning communities. Computer applications, especially the internet and world wide web, are an extremely efficient way of doing this2 Expands pedagogical horizons —The most controversial argument for … RETURN TO TEXT
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Barriers and solutions to online learning in medical education – an integrative review
O’Doherty, D., Dromey, M., Lougheed, J., Hannigan, A., Last, J., & McGrath, D. (2018) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-018-1240-0 · Cited by 1,032
Khalil, R., Mansour, A. E., Fadda, W. A., Almisnid, K., Aldamegh, M., Al-Nafeesah, A., Alkhalifah, A., & Al-Wutayd, O. (2020) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-020-02208-z · Cited by 893
“We conducted this qualitative study to assess the effectiveness of these techniques and [9, 10] the barriers to medical students ’ engagement in online learning [9].”
MethodComputerized Virtual Patients in Health Professions Education: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Cook, D. A., Erwin, P. J., & Triola, M. M. (2010) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181edfe13 · Cited by 570
De Mattei, L., Morato, M. Q., Sidhu, V., Gautam, N., Mendonca, C. T., Tsai, A., Hammer, M., Creighton-Wong, L., & Azzam, A. (2024) · Clinical Simulation in Nursing · doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2024.101536 · Cited by 28
Tuti, T., Winters, N., Edgcombe, H., Muinga, N., Wanyama, C., English, M., & Paton, C. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/17100 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenhalgh, T.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2001-01-06
- Volume
- 322
- Issue
- 7277
- Pages
- 40-44
- ISSN
- 0959-8138 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2076572728
- Cited by
- 423
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Computer assisted learning in undergraduate medical education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.322.7277.40
- The paper
- Greenhalgh, T. (2001). Computer assisted learning in undergraduate medical education. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7277.40
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.