Top Three Learning Platforms for Orthopaedic In-Training Knowledge Produce Different Results

A. Margalit, Patrick Mixa, Louis Day, M. Marrache, Stuart Mitchell, K. Suresh, K. Wang, Samir Sabharwal, T. P. Li, Alexander E. Loeb, Qais Naziri, R. Henn, D. Laporte
{"title":"Top Three Learning Platforms for Orthopaedic In-Training Knowledge Produce Different Results","authors":"A. Margalit, Patrick Mixa, Louis Day, M. Marrache, Stuart Mitchell, K. Suresh, K. Wang, Samir Sabharwal, T. P. Li, Alexander E. Loeb, Qais Naziri, R. Henn, D. Laporte","doi":"10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-21-00148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the influence of objective and subjective measures of the three learning programs (OrthoBullets [OB], ResStudy [RS], and Clinical Classroom [CC]) on resident test performance and study platform preference. Methods: Sixty residents from three orthopaedic residencies were included in this study during May 2020. Trauma, pediatrics, and hip/knee reconstruction (joints) were chosen as testing topics. Residents took a standardized pretest of 30 questions per topic, followed by the completion of 50 questions per day for 5 days using one of the three web-based programs, followed by a standardized subject-specific posttest. This cycle was repeated for all the three topics. Bivariate statistics and a mixed-effects linear regression model were used to compare improvements in the scores. Results: Across all learning platforms, topics, and postgraduate year classes, posttest scores were 4.4% higher than the pretest score (73.3% vs. 68.9%, P < 0.001): 6.8% higher with OB, 5.4% with RS, and 1.0% with CC. The score improvement with OB was significantly greater than the score improvement with CC (P < 0.001). In total, 100% of residents reported that using OB would improve their score on the orthopaedic in-training examination, compared with 95% with RS and 67% with CC. Conclusion: OB demonstrated the greatest improvement in scores, followed closely by RS and then CC.","PeriodicalId":145112,"journal":{"name":"JAAOS Global Research & Reviews","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAAOS Global Research & Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-21-00148","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective: To compare the influence of objective and subjective measures of the three learning programs (OrthoBullets [OB], ResStudy [RS], and Clinical Classroom [CC]) on resident test performance and study platform preference. Methods: Sixty residents from three orthopaedic residencies were included in this study during May 2020. Trauma, pediatrics, and hip/knee reconstruction (joints) were chosen as testing topics. Residents took a standardized pretest of 30 questions per topic, followed by the completion of 50 questions per day for 5 days using one of the three web-based programs, followed by a standardized subject-specific posttest. This cycle was repeated for all the three topics. Bivariate statistics and a mixed-effects linear regression model were used to compare improvements in the scores. Results: Across all learning platforms, topics, and postgraduate year classes, posttest scores were 4.4% higher than the pretest score (73.3% vs. 68.9%, P < 0.001): 6.8% higher with OB, 5.4% with RS, and 1.0% with CC. The score improvement with OB was significantly greater than the score improvement with CC (P < 0.001). In total, 100% of residents reported that using OB would improve their score on the orthopaedic in-training examination, compared with 95% with RS and 67% with CC. Conclusion: OB demonstrated the greatest improvement in scores, followed closely by RS and then CC.
排名前三的骨科在职知识学习平台效果不同
目的:比较三个学习项目(OrthoBullets [OB]、ResStudy [RS]和Clinical Classroom [CC])的客观和主观测量对住院医师考试成绩和学习平台偏好的影响。方法:2020年5月,来自三家骨科住院医师的60名住院医师被纳入本研究。选择创伤、儿科和髋关节/膝关节重建(关节)作为测试主题。住院医师先进行每个主题30个问题的标准化预测,然后连续5天每天使用三个基于网络的程序之一完成50个问题,然后进行标准化的特定主题后测。所有三个主题都重复了这个循环。使用双变量统计和混合效应线性回归模型来比较得分的改善。结果:在所有学习平台、主题和研究生学年课程中,测试后得分比测试前得分高4.4%(73.3%比68.9%,P < 0.001), OB组高6.8%,RS组高5.4%,CC组高1.0%,OB组的分数提高显著大于CC组(P < 0.001)。总的来说,100%的住院医师报告使用OB会提高他们在骨科培训考试中的分数,而使用RS和CC的分数分别为95%和67%。结论:OB的分数提高最大,RS次之,CC次之。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信