U K Egodage, C Wijewickrama, S Gunawardana, A Basnayaka, B Dissanayake
{"title":"Use of online resources to study physiology by preclinical medical students: an experience from a developing country.","authors":"U K Egodage, C Wijewickrama, S Gunawardana, A Basnayaka, B Dissanayake","doi":"10.1152/advan.00061.2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are concerns from physiology specialists in the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ruhuna on the possible wide usage of easily accessible but potentially unreliable online materials to study. The full picture is not clear as this area was underexplored. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted using an online, self-administered questionnaire that was designed specifically for this study and has not been previously validated to evaluate the prevalence, types, and practices of online resource usage to study physiology. All second-year medical students who had recently completed the second Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) examination in 2024 were recruited. Out of 185 students who responded, 77.8% used recommended textbooks as the preferred choice to study physiology. On the other hand, 100% reported use of online resources. Most students (<i>n</i> = 171) used smartphones for internet access. ChatGPT was the preferred online tool for 71.9% (<i>n</i> = 133), while 76.2% (<i>n</i> = 141) used YouTube to watch online video clips to understand physiology concepts. Notably, 54.05% (<i>n</i> = 100) used YouTube videos at random, while 16.7% used Ninja Nerd and 16.2% used Khan Academy. A total of 52% (<i>n</i> = 96) utilized video materials on most days while 81% of students first searched online for answers before consulting their lecturers. Most students (76.6%) mentioned that videos are easy to understand. Over half (54.57%) strongly agreed or agreed with \"fact-checking\" using recommended textbooks, articles, or lecture materials provided by the Physiology Department. Most students preferred online resources like ChatGPT and YouTube for learning physiology, showing a shift toward digital tools. Although many students fact-check content, clear guidance on selecting reliable online materials is necessary, given their widespread usage.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This study reveals that while most second-year medical students at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ruhuna still use recommended textbooks, almost all of them rely on online resources like ChatGPT and YouTube for studying physiology. Although many students who use online resources fact-check the content, clear guidance on selecting reliable materials is necessary due to their widespread use.</p>","PeriodicalId":50852,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Physiology Education","volume":" ","pages":"742-748"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Physiology Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00061.2025","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
There are concerns from physiology specialists in the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ruhuna on the possible wide usage of easily accessible but potentially unreliable online materials to study. The full picture is not clear as this area was underexplored. An observational cross-sectional study was conducted using an online, self-administered questionnaire that was designed specifically for this study and has not been previously validated to evaluate the prevalence, types, and practices of online resource usage to study physiology. All second-year medical students who had recently completed the second Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery (MBBS) examination in 2024 were recruited. Out of 185 students who responded, 77.8% used recommended textbooks as the preferred choice to study physiology. On the other hand, 100% reported use of online resources. Most students (n = 171) used smartphones for internet access. ChatGPT was the preferred online tool for 71.9% (n = 133), while 76.2% (n = 141) used YouTube to watch online video clips to understand physiology concepts. Notably, 54.05% (n = 100) used YouTube videos at random, while 16.7% used Ninja Nerd and 16.2% used Khan Academy. A total of 52% (n = 96) utilized video materials on most days while 81% of students first searched online for answers before consulting their lecturers. Most students (76.6%) mentioned that videos are easy to understand. Over half (54.57%) strongly agreed or agreed with "fact-checking" using recommended textbooks, articles, or lecture materials provided by the Physiology Department. Most students preferred online resources like ChatGPT and YouTube for learning physiology, showing a shift toward digital tools. Although many students fact-check content, clear guidance on selecting reliable online materials is necessary, given their widespread usage.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study reveals that while most second-year medical students at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Ruhuna still use recommended textbooks, almost all of them rely on online resources like ChatGPT and YouTube for studying physiology. Although many students who use online resources fact-check the content, clear guidance on selecting reliable materials is necessary due to their widespread use.
期刊介绍:
Advances in Physiology Education promotes and disseminates educational scholarship in order to enhance teaching and learning of physiology, neuroscience and pathophysiology. The journal publishes peer-reviewed descriptions of innovations that improve teaching in the classroom and laboratory, essays on education, and review articles based on our current understanding of physiological mechanisms. Submissions that evaluate new technologies for teaching and research, and educational pedagogy, are especially welcome. The audience for the journal includes educators at all levels: K–12, undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs.