Cited by 193Innovations in Medical EducationIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningE-Learning and COVID-19

Efficacy of adaptive e-learning for health professionals and students: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Fontaine, Guillaume, Cossette, Sylvie, Maheu-Cadotte, Marc-André, Mailhot, Tanya, Deschênes, Marie-France, Mathieu-Dupuis, Gabrielle, Côté, José, Gagnon, Marie-Pierre +1 more·2019·BMJ Open

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Although adaptive e-learning environments (AEEs) can provide personalised instruction to health professional and students, their efficacy remains unclear. Therefore, this review aimed to identify, appraise and synthesise the evidence regarding the efficacy of AEEs in improving knowledge, skills and clinical behaviour in health professionals and students. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO, PubMed and Web of Science from the first year of records to February 2019. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Controlled studies that evaluated the effect of an AEE on knowledge, skills or clinical behaviour in health professionals or students. SCREENING, DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two authors screened studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and coded quality of evidence independently. AEEs were reviewed with regard to their topic, theoretical framework and adaptivity process. Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they had a non-adaptive e-learning environment control group and had no missing data. Effect sizes (ES) were pooled using a random effects model. RESULTS: From a pool of 10 569 articles, we included 21 eligible studies enrolling 3684 health professionals and students. Clinical topics were mostly related to diagnostic testing, theoretical frameworks were varied and the adaptivity process was characterised by five subdomains: method, goals, timing, factors and types. The pooled ES was 0.70 for knowledge (95% CI -0.08 to 1.49; p.08) and 1.19 for skills (95% CI 0.59 to 1.79; p<0.00001). Risk of bias was generally high. Heterogeneity was large in all analyses. CONCLUSIONS: AEEs appear particularly effective in improving skills in health professionals and students. The adaptivity process within AEEs may be more beneficial for learning skills rather than factual knowledge, which generates less cognitive load. Future research should report more clearly on the design and adaptivity process of AEEs, and target higher-level outcomes, such as clinical behaviour. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017065585.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-025252

Cites

58 of 58 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. [14]Brusilovsky P, Adaptive PC Adaptive and intelligent web-based educational systems. Int J Art Intel Educ 2003; 13: 159– 72.
  2. [22]Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Epoc resources for review authors, 2017 Available: http://epoc.cochrane.org/resources/epoc-resources-review-authors
  3. [27]EPOC Cochrane Review Group What study designs should be included in an EPOC review and what should they be called? 2014 Available: https://epoc.cochrane.org/sites/epoc.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/EPOC%20Study%20Designs%20About.pdf2017
  4. [28]EPOC Cochrane Review Group Data extraction and management: EPOC resources for review authors Oslo. Norway: Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, 2013.
  5. [51]Cognitive Science Society Adaptive perceptual learning in electrocardiography: the synergy of passive and active classification. 37th annual conference of the. Pasadena, CA, 2015.
  6. [54]Feyzi-Behnagh R, Azevedo R, Legowski E, et al Metacognitive scaffolds improve self-judgments of accuracy in a medical intelligent tutoring system. Instructional Science 2014; 42: 159– 81. 10.1007/s11251-013-9275-4 24532850 PMC3923630 · DOI
  7. [55]Cook DA, Beckman TJ, Thomas KG, et al Adapting web-based instruction to residents’ knowledge improves learning efficiency. J Gen Intern Med 2008; 23: 985– 90. 10.1007/s11606-008-0541-0 18612729 PMC2517946 · DOI
  8. [56]El Saadawi GM, Tseytlin E, Legowski E, et al A natural language intelligent tutoring system for training pathologists: implementation and evaluation. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2008; 13: 709– 22. 10.1007/s10459-007-9081-3 17934789 PMC2753375 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fontaine, G., Cossette, S., Maheu-Cadotte, M.-A., Mailhot, T., Deschênes, M.-F., Mathieu-Dupuis, G., Côté, J., Gagnon, M.-P., & Dubé, V.
Affiliations
  • Montreal Heart Institute (CA)
  • Faculty of Nursing, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada
  • Northeastern University (US)
  • Université de Montréal (CA)
  • Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Fontaine, Guillaume
Venue
BMJ Open
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2019-08
Volume
9
Issue
8
Pages
e025252
ISSN
2044-6055 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2970147776
Cited by
193
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 50 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 1
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ Open (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Papyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • AstraZeneca
  • Canadian Nurses Foundation
  • Fondation Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal
  • Institut de Cardiologie de Montréal
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › E-Learning and COVID-19
Keywords
adaptive e-learning, adaptive learning environments, healthcare workers, medical students, knowledge acquisition, clinical skills, clinical behavior, cognitive load
MeSH terms
Computer-Assisted Instruction, Education, Medical, Health Personnel, Humans, Learning

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