Dataset Information

Transferring the sandwich principle to instructional videos: is it worth the effort?

ABSTRACT:

Background

The sandwich principle is an educational concept that regularly alternates between collective and individual learning phases within one learning unit. Applying sandwich principle to lectures has proven to be more effective for learning outcomes than classical lectures. Supposedly, this teaching format also leads to a beneficial knowledge transfer when applied to other teaching formats. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the sandwich principle on instructional videos and how its use was evaluated by students.

Methods

Participants (n = 51) were randomly allocated into two groups. Both groups were given a test to assess the baseline level of knowledge. Afterwards, the control group watched the normal instructional video on cleft lips and palates, while the sandwich group watched the same video modified according to the sandwich principle. The participants then had to answer 30 single-choice questions to assess their knowledge gain and evaluate the instructional video. Long-term retention of the knowledge was tested again 6 months later using the same test questions. The unpaired t-test and ANOVA were used to compare the results.

Results

Comparison of the pre-test and post-test results of both groups showed significantly increased test scores (p < 0.0001). Regarding long-term retention, the mean test scores were still significantly higher in both groups than before watching the video (p < 0.0001). For all test results, there was no significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). The evaluation showed that the students highly appreciated the modified video and found the interruptions for repetition of previously learned knowledge useful.

Conclusion

The hypothesis that the modification of instructional videos according to the sandwich principle would lead to an improved learning outcome could not be proved subjectively or objectively. Nevertheless, the teaching format was highly appreciated by the students and may have increased their motivation to learn with instructional videos.

SUBMITTER: Bock A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8501714 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The majority of musculoskeletal modelling studies investigating healthy populations use generic models linearly scaled to roughly match an individual's anthropometry. Generic models disregard the considerable variation in musculoskeletal geometry and tissue properties between individuals. This study investigated the physiological implications of personalizing musculoskeletal model geometry (body segment mass, inertia, joint center, and maximum isometric muscle force). Nine healthy athletes performed ten repetitions of 15 meter sprints at 75-95% of their maximum sprinting speed and ten repetitions of unanticipated sidestep cut trials with a 4.5-5.5 m/s approach running speed. Structural magnetic resonance imaging was collected on the lower extremities, from which subject-specific musculoskeletal models were developed. A one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping paired t-test was used to compare generic and subject-specific musculoskeletal models for: lower-limb kinematics, kinetics, torque matching, as well as hamstrings, adductors, and quadriceps muscle activations and fiber dynamics. Percentage change of geometric parameters between generic and subject-specific models were determined. Compared to generic models, subject-specific models showed significantly lower ankle dorsi/plantar flexion angle during sprinting and several significantly different net joint moments during sprint and cut tasks. Additionally, subject-specific models demonstrated better torque matching, more physiologically plausible fiber lengths, higher fiber velocities, lower muscle forces, and lower simulated activations in a subset of investigated muscles and motor tasks. Furthermore, subject-specific models identified between-limb differences that were not identified with generic models. Use of subject-specific modeling, even in healthy populations, may result in more physiologically plausible muscle fiber mechanics. Implementing subject-specific models may be especially beneficial when investigating populations with substantial geometric between-limb differences, or unilateral musculoskeletal pathologies, as these are not captured by a generic model.

Project description:BackgroundAllergic rhinitis is a common disorder affecting both children and adults. Recommended treatment consists of intranasal corticosteroid spray administration, but only few patients administer the nasal spray in the correct technical manner. A wrong administration technique may result in side effects and affect the efficacy and adherence, thus making accurate administration instructions indispensable. Unfortunately, information about intranasal drug administration is generally not explained accurately, thereby leading to confusion among patients and inaccuracy in the self-administration of drugs.ObjectiveIn this study, we analyzed instructional videos available on YouTube for the administration of nasal sprays for allergic rhinitis. Our aim was to determine if the videos provided instructions in accordance with the standardized nationwide patient protocol in the Netherlands for intranasal spray administration.MethodsInstructional videos for the administration of aqueous formulations of nasal spray for allergic rhinitis were found on YouTube. All videos were reviewed by 2 researchers and scored using the instructions from the Dutch standardized protocol. Correct instructions were given a score of 1, while incorrect or missing instructions were given a score of 0. The interrater reliability using Cohen ĸ was used to determine the differences in the scores between the researchers.ResultsWe identified 33 YouTube videos made by different health care professionals and pharmaceutical companies around the world. None of the videos displayed all the steps correctly, while 5 of the 33 (15%) videos displayed over 75% of the steps correctly. The median score of the correctly displayed steps was 11 out of 19 (range 2-17, IQR 6). The interrater reliability using Cohen ĸ was statistically significant (range 0.872-1.00, P<.001). The steps "neutral position of the head," "breathing out through the mouth," and "periodically cleaning with water" scored the lowest and were incorrectly displayed in 28 (85%), 28 (85%), and 30 (91%) of the 33 videos, respectively.ConclusionsThe findings of our study revealed that only few instructional videos on YouTube provided correct instructions for the administration of nasal sprays to patients. The inaccuracy of the instructions for nasal spray administration in the majority of the videos may lead to confusion in patients and incorrect use of nasal sprays. In the future, it is important to make evidence-based instructional videos that show patients the correct technique of nasal spray administration.Trial registrationNot applicable.