Digital health competencies in medical school education: a scoping review and Delphi method study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
In order to fulfill the enormous potential of digital health in the healthcare sector, digital health must become an integrated part of medical education. We aimed to investigate which knowledge, skills and attitudes should be included in a digital health curriculum for medical students through a scoping review and Delphi method study.Methods
We conducted a scoping review of the literature on digital health relevant for medical education. Key topics were split into three sub-categories: knowledge (facts, concepts, and information), skills (ability to carry out tasks) and attitudes (ways of thinking or feeling). Thereafter, we used a modified Delphi method where experts rated digital health topics over two rounds based on whether topics should be included in the curriculum for medical students on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). A predefined cut-off of ≥4 was used to identify topics that were critical to include in a digital health curriculum for medical students.Results
The scoping review resulted in a total of 113 included articles, with 65 relevant topics extracted and included in the questionnaire. The topics were rated by 18 experts, all of which completed both questionnaire rounds. A total of 40 (62%) topics across all three sub-categories met the predefined rating cut-off value of ≥4.Conclusion
An expert panel identified 40 important digital health topics within knowledge, skills, and attitudes for medical students to be taught. These can help guide medical educators in the development of future digital health curricula.
SUBMITTER: Khurana MP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8881190 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Digital health competencies in medical school education: a scoping review and Delphi method study.
Khurana Mark P MP Raaschou-Pedersen Daniel E DE Kurtzhals Jørgen J Bardram Jakob E JE Ostrowski Sisse R SR Bundgaard Johan S JS
BMC medical education 20220226 1
<h4>Introduction</h4>In order to fulfill the enormous potential of digital health in the healthcare sector, digital health must become an integrated part of medical education. We aimed to investigate which knowledge, skills and attitudes should be included in a digital health curriculum for medical students through a scoping review and Delphi method study.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a scoping review of the literature on digital health relevant for medical education. Key topics were split into t ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, the use of digital technology in the education of health care professionals has surged, partly driven by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is still a need for focused research to establish evidence of its effectiveness.ObjectiveThis study aimed to define the gaps in the evidence for the efficacy of digital education and to identify priority areas where future research has the potential to contribute to our understanding and use of digital education.MethodsWe used a 2-stage approach to identify research priorities. First, an umbrella review of the recent literature (published between 2020 and 2023) was performed to identify and build on existing work. Second, expert consensus on the priority research questions was obtained using a modified Delphi method.ResultsA total of 8857 potentially relevant papers were identified. Using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology, we included 217 papers for full review. All papers were either systematic reviews or meta-analyses. A total of 151 research recommendations were extracted from the 217 papers. These were analyzed, recategorized, and consolidated to create a final list of 63 questions. From these, a modified Delphi process with 42 experts was used to produce the top-five rated research priorities: (1) How do we measure the learning transfer from digital education into the clinical setting? (2) How can we optimize the use of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and deep learning to facilitate education and training? (3) What are the methodological requirements for high-quality rigorous studies assessing the outcomes of digital health education? (4) How does the design of digital education interventions (eg, format and modality) in health professionals' education and training curriculum affect learning outcomes? and (5) How should learning outcomes in the field of health professions' digital education be defined and standardized?ConclusionsThis review provides a prioritized list of research gaps in digital education in health care, which will be of use to researchers, educators, education providers, and funding agencies. Additional proposals are discussed regarding the next steps needed to advance this agenda, aiming to promote meaningful and practical research on the use of digital technologies and drive excellence in health care education.
| S-EPMC11888089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDietary modifications are considered a first-line intervention for chronic disease management, yet graduating doctors still report not feeling competent to counsel patients on their diet. Research has focused on methods to address this shortfall in physician competency, including culinary medicine. Culinary medicine is an approach to education that involves hands-on food and cooking learning experiences to equip participants with tools for improving the nutrition behaviour and health of their future patients. Despite positive findings in the efficacy of these interventions, they differ markedly in approach and target, which therefore fails to provide adequate evidence that could serve to guide future culinary medicine interventions.ObjectiveA scoping review to synthesize the existing literature on culinary medicine interventions that are offered during medical training.MethodsOnline databases were used to identify literature published prior to April 2022 that involve a hands-on culinary medicine component to nutrition and examine academic impact, feasibility and acceptability.ResultsTwenty-four studies met the eligibility criteria. Despite promising gains in nutrition knowledge, confidence and high acceptability of the programs, large variations exist in delivery method, setting, and course content between programs. There is a lack of program cost reporting and long-term follow up of participants, inconsistent evidence for improved nutrition attitudes amongst participants, as well as geographically limited adoption of such programs.ConclusionsThe findings of this research demonstrate a clear increase in interest in the use of hands-on culinary medicine programs as educational tools, evidence of feasibility in implementation, and improved student nutritional knowledge, skill and counseling compared to a traditional didactic curriculum. The quality of culinary medicine research studies is increasing and the aims of research are narrowing to focus on how culinary medicine can positively impact medical education. The findings from this review will aid in legitimising culinary medicine as an effective delivery method of nutritional education in medical programs.
| S-EPMC9175378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundArtificial intelligence (AI) has affected our day-to-day in a great extent. Healthcare industry is one of the mainstream fields among those and produced a noticeable change in treatment and education. Medical students must comprehend well why AI technologies mediate and frame their decisions on medical issues. Formalizing of instruction on AI concepts can facilitate learners to grasp AI outcomes in association with their sensory perceptions and thinking in the dynamic and ambiguous reality of daily medical practice. The purpose of this study is to provide consensus on the competencies required by medical graduates to be ready for artificial intelligence technologies and possible applications in medicine and reporting the results.Materials and methodsA three-round e-Delphi survey was conducted between February 2020 and November 2020. The Delphi panel accorporated experts from different backgrounds; (i) healthcare professionals/ academicians; (ii) computer and data science professionals/ academics; (iii) law and ethics professionals/ academics; and (iv) medical students. Round 1 in the Delphi survey began with exploratory open-ended questions. Responses received in the first round evaluated and refined to a 27-item questionnaire which then sent to the experts to be rated using a 7-point Likert type scale (1: Strongly Disagree-7: Strongly Agree). Similar to the second round, the participants repeated their assessments in the third round by using the second-round analysis. The agreement level and strength of the consensus was decided based on third phase results. Median scores was used to calculate the agreement level and the interquartile range (IQR) was used for determining the strength of the consensus.ResultsAmong 128 invitees, a total of 94 agreed to become members of the expert panel. Of them 75 (79.8%) completed the Round 1 questionnaire, 69/75 (92.0%) completed the Round 2 and 60/69 (87.0%) responded to the Round 3. There was a strong agreement on the 23 items and weak agreement on the 4 items.ConclusionsThis study has provided a consensus list of the competencies required by the medical graduates to be ready for AI implications that would bring new perspectives to medical education curricula. The unique feature of the current research is providing a guiding role in integrating AI into curriculum processes, syllabus content and training of medical students.
| S-EPMC9302857 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMedical schools worldwide are accelerating the introduction of digital health courses into their curricula. The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to this swift and widespread transition to digital health and education. However, the need for digital health competencies goes beyond the COVID-19 pandemic because they are becoming essential for the delivery of effective, efficient, and safe care.ObjectiveThis review aims to collate and analyze studies evaluating digital health education for medical students to inform the development of future courses and identify areas where curricula may need to be strengthened.MethodsWe carried out a scoping review by following the guidance of the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the results were reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. We searched 6 major bibliographic databases and gray literature sources for articles published between January 2000 and November 2019. Two authors independently screened the retrieved citations and extracted the data from the included studies. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus discussions between the authors. The findings were analyzed using thematic analysis and presented narratively.ResultsA total of 34 studies focusing on different digital courses were included in this review. Most of the studies (22/34, 65%) were published between 2010 and 2019 and originated in the United States (20/34, 59%). The reported digital health courses were mostly elective (20/34, 59%), were integrated into the existing curriculum (24/34, 71%), and focused mainly on medical informatics (17/34, 50%). Most of the courses targeted medical students from the first to third year (17/34, 50%), and the duration of the courses ranged from 1 hour to 3 academic years. Most of the studies (22/34, 65%) reported the use of blended education. A few of the studies (6/34, 18%) delivered courses entirely digitally by using online modules, offline learning, massive open online courses, and virtual patient simulations. The reported courses used various assessment approaches such as paper-based assessments, in-person observations, and online assessments. Most of the studies (30/34, 88%) evaluated courses mostly by using an uncontrolled before-and-after design and generally reported improvements in students' learning outcomes.ConclusionsDigital health courses reported in literature are mostly elective, focus on a single area of digital health, and lack robust evaluation. They have diverse delivery, development, and assessment approaches. There is an urgent need for high-quality studies that evaluate digital health education.
| S-EPMC8339984 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The widening gap between innovations in the medical field and the dissemination of such information to doctors may affect the quality of care. Offline computer-based digital education (OCDE) may be a potential solution to overcoming the geographical, financial, and temporal obstacles faced by doctors. OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this systematic review were to evaluate the effectiveness of OCDE compared with face-to-face learning, no intervention, or other types of digital learning for improving medical doctors' knowledge, cognitive skills, and patient-related outcomes. Secondary objectives were to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of OCDE and any adverse effects. METHODS:We searched major bibliographic databases from 1990 to August 2017 to identify relevant articles and followed the Cochrane methodology for systematic reviews of intervention. RESULTS:Overall, 27 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 cluster RCT (cRCT), and 1 quasi-RCT were included in this review. The total number of participants was 1690 in addition to the cRCT, which included 24 practices. Due to the heterogeneity of the participants, interventions, and outcomes, meta-analysis was not feasible, and the results were presented as narrative summary. Compared with face-to-face learning, the effect of OCDE on knowledge gain is uncertain (ratio of the means [RM] range 0.95-1.17; 8 studies, 495 participants; very low grade of evidence). From the same comparison, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skill gain is uncertain (RM range 0.1-0.9; 8 studies, 375 participants; very low grade of evidence). OCDE may have little or no effect on patients' outcome compared with face-to-face education (2 studies, 62 participants; low grade of evidence). Compared with no intervention, OCDE may improve knowledge gain (RM range 1.36-0.98; 4 studies, 401 participants; low grade of evidence). From the same comparison, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skill gain is uncertain (RM range 1.1-1.15; 4 trials, 495 participants; very low grade of evidence). One cRCT, involving 24 practices, investigated patients' outcome in this comparison and showed no difference between the 2 groups with low-grade evidence. Compared with text-based learning, the effect of OCDE on cognitive skills gain is uncertain (RM range 0.91-1.46; 3 trials with 4 interventions; 68 participants; very low-grade evidence). No study in this comparison investigated knowledge gain or patients' outcomes. One study assessed the CE and showed that OCDE was cost-effective when compared with face-to-face learning if the cost is less than or equal to Can $200. No trial evaluated the adverse effect of OCDE. CONCLUSIONS:The effect of OCDE compared with other methods of education on medical doctors' knowledge and cognitive skill gain is uncertain. OCDE may improve doctors' knowledge compared with no intervention but its effect on doctors' cognitive skills is uncertain. OCDE may have little or no effect in improving patients' outcome.
| S-EPMC6418481 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThroughout clinical practice, most doctors will encounter patients with urological conditions. Inclusion of urological topics within medical school curriculums is important to allow doctors to effectively diagnose and manage these conditions, independently and with support from urologists. Awareness of urological education interventions and their effectiveness is essential for improving the quality and outcomes of medical student education. No systematic review of medical school education interventions on urological topics has previously been conducted. This mixed-method systematic review will assess the effectiveness of medical school education interventions on urological topics.Methods and analysisThis mixed-methods systematic review will include qualitative and quantitative studies involving education interventions or practices regarding urological topics conducted within a medical school curriculum. Studies regarding other curriculums including premedical education, junior doctor prevocational education or vocational urological training will be excluded. A search of CINAHL, ERIC, EMBASE, MEDLINE will be conducted for studies published since the year 2001. Dual independent screening of titles and abstracts prior to full text review will be undertaken for all identified results during the initial searches. Any disagreement will be settled by a third reviewer. A convergent segregated approach will be used to synthesise qualitative and quantitative data independently, with the results juxtaposed to identify shared and divergent findings between study types.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval was required for this review. Findings from this review will be disseminated via publication, reports and conference presentations.
| S-EPMC9764640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Medical schools in low- and middle-income countries are facing a shortage of staff, limited infrastructure, and restricted access to fast and reliable internet. Offline digital education may be an alternative solution for these issues, allowing medical students to learn at their own time and pace, without the need for a network connection. OBJECTIVE:The primary objective of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of offline digital education compared with traditional learning or a different form of offline digital education such as CD-ROM or PowerPoint presentations in improving knowledge, skills, attitudes, and satisfaction of medical students. The secondary objective was to assess the cost-effectiveness of offline digital education, changes in its accessibility or availability, and its unintended/adverse effects on students. METHODS:We carried out a systematic review of the literature by following the Cochrane methodology. We searched seven major electronic databases from January 1990 to August 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster RCTs. Two authors independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. We assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations criteria. RESULTS:We included 36 studies with 3325 medical students, of which 33 were RCTs and three were cluster RCTs. The interventions consisted of software programs, CD-ROMs, PowerPoint presentations, computer-based videos, and other computer-based interventions. The pooled estimate of 19 studies (1717 participants) showed no significant difference between offline digital education and traditional learning groups in terms of students' postintervention knowledge scores (standardized mean difference=0.11, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.32; small effect size; low-quality evidence). Meta-analysis of four studies found that, compared with traditional learning, offline digital education improved medical students' postintervention skills (standardized mean difference=1.05, 95% CI 0.15-1.95; large effect size; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain about the effects of offline digital education on students' attitudes and satisfaction due to missing or incomplete outcome data. Only four studies estimated the costs of offline digital education, and none reported changes in accessibility or availability of such education or in the adverse effects. The risk of bias was predominantly high in more than half of the included studies. The overall quality of the evidence was low (for knowledge, skills, attitudes, and satisfaction) due to the study limitations and inconsistency across the studies. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings suggest that offline digital education is as effective as traditional learning in terms of medical students' knowledge and may be more effective than traditional learning in terms of medical students' skills. However, there is a need to further investigate students' attitudes and satisfaction with offline digital education as well as its cost-effectiveness, changes in its accessibility or availability, and any resulting unintended/adverse effects.
| S-EPMC6452290 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGlobally, online and local area network-based (LAN) digital education (ODE) has grown in popularity. Blended learning is used by ODE along with traditional learning. Studies have shown the increasing potential of these technologies in training medical doctors; however, the evidence for its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is unclear.ObjectiveThis systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of online and LAN-based ODE in improving practicing medical doctors' knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction (primary outcomes), practice or behavior change, patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness (secondary outcomes).MethodsWe searched seven electronic databased for randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized trials, and quasi-randomized trials from January 1990 to March 2017. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. We have presented the findings narratively. We mainly compared ODE with self-directed/face-to-face learning and blended learning with self-directed/face-to-face learning.ResultsA total of 93 studies (N=16,895) were included, of which 76 compared ODE (including blended) and self-directed/face-to-face learning. Overall, the effect of ODE (including blended) on postintervention knowledge, skills, attitude, satisfaction, practice or behavior change, and patient outcomes was inconsistent and ranged mostly from no difference between the groups to higher postintervention score in the intervention group (small to large effect size, very low to low quality evidence). Twenty-one studies reported higher knowledge scores (small to large effect size and very low quality) for the intervention, while 20 studies reported no difference in knowledge between the groups. Seven studies reported higher skill score in the intervention (large effect size and low quality), while 13 studies reported no difference in the skill scores between the groups. One study reported a higher attitude score for the intervention (very low quality), while four studies reported no difference in the attitude score between the groups. Four studies reported higher postintervention physician satisfaction with the intervention (large effect size and low quality), while six studies reported no difference in satisfaction between the groups. Eight studies reported higher postintervention practice or behavior change for the ODE group (small to moderate effect size and low quality), while five studies reported no difference in practice or behavior change between the groups. One study reported higher improvement in patient outcome, while three others reported no difference in patient outcome between the groups. None of the included studies reported any unintended/adverse effects or cost-effectiveness of the interventions.ConclusionsEmpiric evidence showed that ODE and blended learning may be equivalent to self-directed/face-to-face learning for training practicing physicians. Few other studies demonstrated that ODE and blended learning may significantly improve learning outcomes compared to self-directed/face-to-face learning. The quality of the evidence in these studies was found to be very low for knowledge. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to confirm these findings.
| S-EPMC6410118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Today's medical students are growing up in a digital age in which the use of smartphones and smart devices is now irrevocably part of professional life. However, the abilities to use these devices that have become so ubiquitous in private life can only be partially transferred to work with patients and the medical setting. Since little is known about digitalization in medical education, the aim of this paper is to gain an overview of the current training in digital competencies at Swiss universities. Methods: The medical deans at all Swiss universities were contacted by telephone and informed about an online survey. The invitation to fill out the Survey Monkey questionnaire was subsequently sent by email to the specific contacts at each university. The survey consisted of questions to be answered using a defined scale and open-ended questions. The survey's focus, topics involving digital competencies, is based on the content in the Principal Relevant Objectives and Framework for Integrative Learning and Education in Switzerland (PROFILES) and the National Competency-based Catalogue of Learning Objective in Undergraduate Medicine (NKLM). Results: All of the dean's offices that were contacted participated in the survey. The topics on digitalization were all rated as relevant or very relevant. Our survey shows a heterogeneous picture in terms of implementing PROFILE and NKLM content. A few universities have well-established educational approaches or even implemented curricula, but often these are still in development. Participants also mentioned factors that are necessary for successfully setting up and implementing curricula dealing with digitalization and factors that can impede such efforts. Conclusion: The importance of acquiring digital competencies during medical study is known and recognized by all Swiss medical schools. Curricular integration varies in its progress and represents major challenges for the medical faculties. It is precisely the inclusion of students in such efforts that may be a potential response to this challenge.
| S-EPMC7672378 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDigitalization is not fully implemented in clinical practice, and several factors have been identified as possible barriers, including the competencies of health care professionals. However, no summary of the available evidence has been provided to date to depict digital health competencies that have been investigated among health care professionals, the tools used in assessing such competencies, and the effective interventions to improve them.ObjectiveThis review aims to summarize digital health competencies investigated to date and the tools used to assess them among health care professionals.MethodsA systematic review based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) checklist was performed. The MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Scopus databases were accessed up to September 4, 2021. Studies assessing digital health competencies with quantitative designs, targeting health care professionals, and written in English were included. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute tools.ResultsA total of 26 studies, published from 1999 to 2021, met the inclusion criteria, and the majority were cross sectional in design, while only 2 were experimental study designs. Most studies were assessed with moderate to low methodological quality; 4 categories and 9 subcategories of investigated digital health competencies have been identified. The most investigated category was "Self-rated competencies," followed by "Psychological and emotional aspects toward digital technologies," "Use of digital technologies," and "Knowledge about digital technologies." In 35% (9/26) of the studies, a previously validated tool was used to measure the competencies assessed, while others developed ad hoc questionnaires.ConclusionsMainly descriptive studies with issues regarding methodology quality have been produced to date investigating 4 main categories of digital health competencies mostly with nonvalidated tools. Competencies investigated might be considered while designing curricula for undergraduate, postgraduate, and continuing education processes, whereas the methodological lacks detected might be addressed with future research. There is a need to expand research on psychological and emotional elements and the ability to use digital technology to self-learn and teach others.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021282775; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=282775.
| S-EPMC9437781 | biostudies-literature