Dataset Information

Design and usability testing of an in-house developed performance feedback tool for medical students.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Feedback is essential in a self-regulated learning environment such as medical education. When feedback channels are widely spread, the need arises for a system of integrating this information in a single platform. This article reports on the design and initial testing of a feedback tool for medical students at Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, a large teaching hospital. Following a needs analysis, we designed and programmed a feedback tool in a user-centered approach. The resulting interface was evaluated prior to release with usability testing and again post release using quantitative/qualitative questionnaires.

Results

The tool we created is a browser application for use on desktop or mobile devices. Students log in to see a dashboard of "cards" featuring summaries of assessment results, a portal for the documentation of acquired practical skills, and an overview of their progress along their course. Users see their cohort's average for each format. Learning analytics rank students' strengths by subject. The interface is characterized by colourful and simple graphics. In its initial form, the tool has been rated positively overall by students. During testing, the high task completion rate (78%) and low overall number of non-critical errors indicated good usability, while the quantitative data (system usability scoring) also indicates high ease of use. The source code for the tool is open-source and can be adapted by other medical faculties.

Conclusions

The results suggest that the implemented tool LevelUp is well-accepted by students. It therefore holds promise for improved, digitalized integrated feedback about students' learning progress. Our aim is that LevelUp will help medical students to keep track of their study progress and reflect on their skills. Further development will integrate users' recommendations for additional features as well as optimizing data flow.

SUBMITTER: Roa Romero Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8220763 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSelf-explanation without feedback has been shown to improve medical students' diagnostic reasoning. While feedback is generally seen as beneficial for learning, available evidence of the value of its combination with self-explanation is conflicting. This study investigated the effect on medical students' diagnostic performance of adding immediate or delayed content-feedback to self-explanation while solving cases.MethodsNinety-four 3rd-year students from a Canadian medical school were randomly assigned to three experimental conditions (immediate-feedback, delayed-feedback, control). In the learning phase, all students solved four clinical cases by giving i) the most likely diagnosis, ii) two main arguments supporting this diagnosis, and iii) two plausible alternative diagnoses, while using self-explanation. The immediate-feedback group was given the correct diagnosis after each case; delayed-feedback group received the correct diagnoses only after the four cases; control group received no feedback. One week later, all students solved four near-transfer (i.e., same final diagnosis as the learning cases but different scenarios) and four far-transfer cases (i.e., different final diagnosis from the learning cases and different scenarios) by answering the same three questions. Students' diagnostic accuracy (score for the response to the first question only) and diagnostic performance (combined score of responses to the three questions) scores were assessed in each phase. Four one-way ANOVAs were performed on each of the two scores for near and far-transfer cases.ResultsThere was a significant effect of experimental condition on diagnostic accuracy on near-transfer cases (p < .05). The immediate-feedback and delayed-feedback groups performed equally well, both better than control (respectively, mean = 90.73, standard deviation =10.69; mean = 89.92, standard deviation = 13.85; mean = 82.03, standard deviation = 17.66). The experimental conditions did not significantly differ on far-transfer cases.ConclusionsProviding feedback to students in the form of the correct diagnosis after using self-explanation with clinical cases is potentially beneficial to improve their diagnostic accuracy but this effect is limited to similar cases. Further studies should explore how more elaborated feedback combined with self-explanation may impact students' diagnostic performance on different cases.

Project description:PurposePoint-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is a sensitive, safe, and efficient tool used in many clinical settings and is an essential part of medical education in the United States. Numerous studies present improved diagnostic performances and positive clinical outcomes among POCUS users. However, others stress the degree to which the modality is user-dependent, rendering high-quality POCUS training necessary in medical education. In this study, the authors aimed to investigate the potential of an artificial intelligence (AI) based quality indicator tool as a teaching device for cardiac POCUS performance.MethodsThe authors integrated the quality indicator tool into the pre-clinical cardiac ultrasound course for 4th-year medical students and analyzed their performances. The analysis included 60 students who were assigned to one of two groups as follows: the intervention group using the AI-based quality indicator tool and the control group. Quality indicator users utilized the tool during both the course and the final test. At the end of the course, the authors tested the standard echocardiographic views, and an experienced clinician blindly graded the recorded clips. Results were analyzed and compared between the groups.ResultsThe results showed an advantage in quality indictor users' median overall scores (P = 0.002) with a relative risk of 2.3 (95% CI: 1.10, 4.93, P = 0.03) for obtaining correct cardiac views. In addition, quality indicator users also had a statistically significant advantage in the overall image quality in various cardiac views.ConclusionsThe AI-based quality indicator improved cardiac ultrasound performances among medical students who were trained with it compared to the control group, even in cardiac views in which the indicator was inactive. Performance scores, as well as image quality, were better in the AI-based group. Such tools can potentially enhance ultrasound training, warranting the expansion of the application to more views and prompting further studies on long-term learning effects.

Project description:BackgroundMobile electronic platforms provide exciting possibilities for health behavior promotion. For instance, they can promote smoking cessation, moderate alcohol consumption, healthy eating, and physical activity. Young adults in Sweden are proficient in the use of technology, having been exposed to computers, smartphones, and the internet from an early age. However, with the high availability of mobile health (mHealth) interventions of varying quality, it is critical to optimize the usability of mHealth interventions to ensure long-term use of these health promotion interventions.ObjectiveThis study aims to investigate the usability of an mHealth intervention (LIFE4YOUth) targeting health behaviors among high school students through heuristic evaluation and usability testing.MethodsA preliminary version of the LIFE4YOUth mHealth intervention, which was aimed at promoting healthy eating, physical activity, smoking cessation, and nonrisky drinking among high school students, was developed in early 2019. We completed a total of 15 heuristic evaluations and 5 usability tests to evaluate the usability of the mHealth intervention prototype to improve its functioning, content, and design.ResultsHeuristic evaluation from a total of 15 experts (10 employees and 5 university students, both women and men, aged 18-25 years) revealed that the major usability problems and the worst ratings, a total of 17 problems termed usability catastrophes, concerned shortcomings in displaying easy-to-understand information to the users or technical errors. The results of the usability testing including 5 high school students (both girls and boys, aged 15-18 years) showed that the design, quality, and quantity of content in the intervention may impact the users' level of engagement. Poor functionality was considered a major barrier to usability. Of the 5 participants, one rated the LIFE4YOUth intervention as poor, 2 rated as average, and 2 assessed it as good, according to the System Usability Scale.ConclusionsHigh school students have high expectations of digital products. If an mHealth intervention does not offer optimal functions, they may cease to use it. Optimizing the usability of mHealth interventions is a critical step in the development process. Heuristic evaluation and usability testing in this study provided valuable knowledge about the prototype from a user's perspective. The findings may lead to the development of similar interventions targeting the high school population.