E-Learning perception and satisfaction among health sciences students amid the COVID-19 pandemic
Abstract
BACKGROUND: E-learning is increasingly used during the COVID-19 pandemic, however the impact of this change on students is not known. This study aimed to evaluate perception and satisfaction of health sciences students towards E-learning during the COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS: A structured questionnaire was distributed to 2000 health care students either through email or social media platforms. The questionnaire was divided into two sections: the first section addressed demographic information such as age, education level, course of study, number of lectures attended and country. The second section gathered information on perception and satisfaction of students using 13 close-ended questions. Frequencies and percentages were assessed for demographic data, perception and satisfaction level of students. The paired sample t-test, independent t test and Spearman correlation were applied to evaluate statistical significance between different variables of the study. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Data from 1255 participants were included at a response rate of 66.4%. More than one third (37%) of the students took 25 or more online E-learning sessions and 47% preferred Zoom as an online platform. Participants belonged to 11 countries from developed and developing nations. 41% reported interference of E-learning due to network problems. 60% considered that clinical and practical skills are best learned in clinics and laboratories. More than one third of the students preferred classroom teaching and 34% of the students did not feel confident enough to take exit exams after E-learning sessions. CONCLUSION: E-learning satisfaction levels were better among developed countries (7.34) compared to developing countries (5.82). The majority of participants agreed that E-learning was satisfactory in acquiring knowledge, however not effective in acquiring clinical and technical skills. As the COVID-19 lockdown eases, there is a need for improvement in the methods employed in E-learning and more blended learning among healthcare students is recommended.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Globally, students have expressed high distress levels, low engagement, and confidence in their academic performance and professional development in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Globally, students have expressed high distress levels, low engagement, and confidence in their academic performance and professional development in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic [5, 6].”
From Supporting underrepresented students in health sciences: a fuzzy cognitive mapping approach to program evaluation (2024) · cites this paper as [5]
Cites
The adequacy of response rates to online and paper surveys: what can be done?
Nulty, D. D. (2008) · Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/02602930701293231 · Cited by 2,581 · see citing works
Web-based learning: pros, cons and controversies
Cook, D. A. (2007) · Clinical Medicine · doi:10.7861/clinmedicine.7-1-37 · Cited by 437 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Regular training with update of software’s and technological methods with emphasis on familiarizing with platforms used in E-learning should be at student’s disposal [37, 38].”
MethodTracking e-learning through published papers: A systematic review
Rodrigues, H., Almeida, F., Figueiredo, V., & Lopes, S. L. (2019) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.007 · Cited by 399 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Elnour, A. A., Abou Hajal, A., Goaddar, R., Elsharkawy, N., Mousa, S., Dabbagh, N., Mohamad Al Qahtani, M., Al Balooshi, S., Othman Al Damook, N., & Sadeq, A. (2023) · Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal · doi:10.1016/j.jsps.2023.05.024 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Chiang, D. F., Guerrero, S. A., Sexton, E. C., & Gardner, S. S. (2024) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-024-05292-7 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Abbasi, M. S., Ahmed, N., Sajjad, B., Alshahrani, A., Saeed, S., Sarfaraz, S., Alhamdan, R. S., Vohra, F., & Abduljabbar, T.
- Affiliations
- Altamash Institute of Dental Medicine (PK)
- King Saud University (SA)
- Department of Health Professions Education, Liaquat College of Medicine & Dentistry, Karachi, Pakistan
- Jinnah Sindh Medical University (PK)
- Restorative Dental Science Department, College of Dentistry, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
- Corresponding author
- Vohra, Fahim
- ORCID
- Venue
- Work
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-12-01
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 549-556
- ISSN
- 1051-9815 (ISSN-L)
- 1875-9270
- OpenAlex
- W3104163885
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 83 · 2022: 87 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 75.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Work (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
- Social Sciences › Education › E-Learning and COVID-19
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Keywords
- online learning, student satisfaction, health sciences students, COVID-19 pandemic, Zoom, clinical skills acquisition, blended learning, developed vs developing countries
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, Adolescent, Adult, Humans, Learning, Perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Education, Distance, Qualitative Research, Pandemics
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