Student Use of Digital Patient Cases May Improve Performance in a Pharmacy Cardiovascular Therapeutics Course.

IF 2 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Pharmacy Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.3390/pharmacy13020031
Paul J Wong, Noam Morningstar-Kywi, Rory E Kim, Tien M H Ng
{"title":"Student Use of Digital Patient Cases May Improve Performance in a Pharmacy Cardiovascular Therapeutics Course.","authors":"Paul J Wong, Noam Morningstar-Kywi, Rory E Kim, Tien M H Ng","doi":"10.3390/pharmacy13020031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of digital patient cases (eCases) is associated with student-perceived improvements in learning. However, novel instructional tools must demonstrate measurable student benefits to justify ongoing use. This research sought to identify the impact of digital patient cases (eCases) on student performance in a PharmD cardiovascular course. Optional eCases for hypertension (HTN), venous thromboembolism (VTE), and acute heart failure (AHF) were incorporated into the course. Performance on the exams and course overall was compared between student cohorts based on eCase use. Aggregated data were analyzed by year. Additional analysis was performed for scores on exam items related to eCase content. From 2020 to 2022, a total of 322/562 students (57.3%) used any eCase. While there were no differences in 2020 and 2021, eCase users in 2022 had significantly higher course (83.6% vs. 79.7%, <i>p</i> = 0.002) and final exam scores (75.0% vs. 67.7%, <i>p</i> < 0.001) compared with non-users. VTE eCase users had higher scores on VTE exam items compared to non-users, but only in 2021. AHF eCase users received higher scores on AHF exam items compared to non-users in 2021 and 2022. Among certain cohorts, student eCase use was associated with improved performance, and the use of certain eCases showed differences in content-specific performance. The eCase is a promising instructional tool that warrants further investigation to determine best design elements for maximal effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":30544,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacy","volume":"13 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11932311/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy13020031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of digital patient cases (eCases) is associated with student-perceived improvements in learning. However, novel instructional tools must demonstrate measurable student benefits to justify ongoing use. This research sought to identify the impact of digital patient cases (eCases) on student performance in a PharmD cardiovascular course. Optional eCases for hypertension (HTN), venous thromboembolism (VTE), and acute heart failure (AHF) were incorporated into the course. Performance on the exams and course overall was compared between student cohorts based on eCase use. Aggregated data were analyzed by year. Additional analysis was performed for scores on exam items related to eCase content. From 2020 to 2022, a total of 322/562 students (57.3%) used any eCase. While there were no differences in 2020 and 2021, eCase users in 2022 had significantly higher course (83.6% vs. 79.7%, p = 0.002) and final exam scores (75.0% vs. 67.7%, p < 0.001) compared with non-users. VTE eCase users had higher scores on VTE exam items compared to non-users, but only in 2021. AHF eCase users received higher scores on AHF exam items compared to non-users in 2021 and 2022. Among certain cohorts, student eCase use was associated with improved performance, and the use of certain eCases showed differences in content-specific performance. The eCase is a promising instructional tool that warrants further investigation to determine best design elements for maximal effectiveness.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pharmacy
Pharmacy PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
自引率
9.10%
发文量
141
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信