Cargando…

Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND: Microlearning, the acquisition of knowledge or skills in the form of small units, is endorsed by health professions educators as a means of facilitating student learning, training, and continuing education, but it is difficult to define in terms of its features and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: De Gagne, Jennie Chang, Park, Hyeyoung Kate, Hall, Katherine, Woodward, Amanda, Yamane, Sandra, Kim, Sang Suk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6683654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31339105
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13997
_version_ 1783442132173848576
author De Gagne, Jennie Chang
Park, Hyeyoung Kate
Hall, Katherine
Woodward, Amanda
Yamane, Sandra
Kim, Sang Suk
author_facet De Gagne, Jennie Chang
Park, Hyeyoung Kate
Hall, Katherine
Woodward, Amanda
Yamane, Sandra
Kim, Sang Suk
author_sort De Gagne, Jennie Chang
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Microlearning, the acquisition of knowledge or skills in the form of small units, is endorsed by health professions educators as a means of facilitating student learning, training, and continuing education, but it is difficult to define in terms of its features and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to conduct a systematic search of the literature on microlearning in health professions education to identify key concepts, characterize microlearning as an educational strategy, and evaluate pedagogical outcomes experienced by health professions students. METHODS: A scoping review was performed using the bibliographic databases PubMed (MEDLINE), CINAHL, Education Resources Information Center, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Education Full Text (HW Wilson), and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. A combination of keywords and subject headings related to microlearning, electronic learning, or just-in-time learning combined with health professions education was used. No date limits were placed on the search, but inclusion was limited to materials published in English. Pedagogical outcomes were evaluated according to the 4-level Kirkpatrick model. RESULTS: A total of 3096 references were retrieved, of which 17 articles were selected after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Articles that met the criteria were published between 2011 and 2018, and their authors were from a range of countries, including the United States, China, India, Australia, Canada, Iran, Netherlands, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. The 17 studies reviewed included various health-related disciplines, such as medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry, and allied health. Although microlearning appeared in a variety of subject areas, different technologies, such as podcast, short messaging service, microblogging, and social networking service, were also used. On the basis of Buchem and Hamelmann’s 10 microlearning concepts, each study satisfied at least 40% of the characteristics, whereas all studies featured concepts of maximum time spent less than 15 min as well as content aggregation. According to our assessment of each article using the Kirkpatrick model, 94% (16/17) assessed student reactions to the microlearning (level 1), 82% (14/17) evaluated knowledge or skill acquisition (level 2), 29% (5/17) measured the effect of the microlearning on student behavior (level 3), and no studies were found at the highest level. CONCLUSIONS: Microlearning as an educational strategy has demonstrated a positive effect on the knowledge and confidence of health professions students in performing procedures, retaining knowledge, studying, and engaging in collaborative learning. However, downsides to microlearning include pedagogical discomfort, technology inequalities, and privacy concerns. Future research should look at higher-level outcomes, including benefits to patients or practice changes. The findings of this scoping review will inform education researchers, faculty, and academic administrators on the application of microlearning, pinpoint gaps in the literature, and help identify opportunities for instructional designers and subject matter experts to improve course content in didactic and clinical settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6683654
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher JMIR Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66836542019-08-19 Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review De Gagne, Jennie Chang Park, Hyeyoung Kate Hall, Katherine Woodward, Amanda Yamane, Sandra Kim, Sang Suk JMIR Med Educ Review BACKGROUND: Microlearning, the acquisition of knowledge or skills in the form of small units, is endorsed by health professions educators as a means of facilitating student learning, training, and continuing education, but it is difficult to define in terms of its features and outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to conduct a systematic search of the literature on microlearning in health professions education to identify key concepts, characterize microlearning as an educational strategy, and evaluate pedagogical outcomes experienced by health professions students. METHODS: A scoping review was performed using the bibliographic databases PubMed (MEDLINE), CINAHL, Education Resources Information Center, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Education Full Text (HW Wilson), and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. A combination of keywords and subject headings related to microlearning, electronic learning, or just-in-time learning combined with health professions education was used. No date limits were placed on the search, but inclusion was limited to materials published in English. Pedagogical outcomes were evaluated according to the 4-level Kirkpatrick model. RESULTS: A total of 3096 references were retrieved, of which 17 articles were selected after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Articles that met the criteria were published between 2011 and 2018, and their authors were from a range of countries, including the United States, China, India, Australia, Canada, Iran, Netherlands, Taiwan, and the United Kingdom. The 17 studies reviewed included various health-related disciplines, such as medicine, nursing, pharmacy, dentistry, and allied health. Although microlearning appeared in a variety of subject areas, different technologies, such as podcast, short messaging service, microblogging, and social networking service, were also used. On the basis of Buchem and Hamelmann’s 10 microlearning concepts, each study satisfied at least 40% of the characteristics, whereas all studies featured concepts of maximum time spent less than 15 min as well as content aggregation. According to our assessment of each article using the Kirkpatrick model, 94% (16/17) assessed student reactions to the microlearning (level 1), 82% (14/17) evaluated knowledge or skill acquisition (level 2), 29% (5/17) measured the effect of the microlearning on student behavior (level 3), and no studies were found at the highest level. CONCLUSIONS: Microlearning as an educational strategy has demonstrated a positive effect on the knowledge and confidence of health professions students in performing procedures, retaining knowledge, studying, and engaging in collaborative learning. However, downsides to microlearning include pedagogical discomfort, technology inequalities, and privacy concerns. Future research should look at higher-level outcomes, including benefits to patients or practice changes. The findings of this scoping review will inform education researchers, faculty, and academic administrators on the application of microlearning, pinpoint gaps in the literature, and help identify opportunities for instructional designers and subject matter experts to improve course content in didactic and clinical settings. JMIR Publications 2019-07-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6683654/ /pubmed/31339105 http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13997 Text en ©Jennie Chang De Gagne, Hyeyoung Kate Park, Katherine Hall, Amanda Woodward, Sandra Yamane, Sang Suk Kim. Originally published in JMIR Medical Education (http://mededu.jmir.org), 23.07.2019. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Medical Education, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://mededu.jmir.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.
spellingShingle Review
De Gagne, Jennie Chang
Park, Hyeyoung Kate
Hall, Katherine
Woodward, Amanda
Yamane, Sandra
Kim, Sang Suk
Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review
title Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review
title_full Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review
title_fullStr Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review
title_full_unstemmed Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review
title_short Microlearning in Health Professions Education: Scoping Review
title_sort microlearning in health professions education: scoping review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6683654/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31339105
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/13997
work_keys_str_mv AT degagnejenniechang microlearninginhealthprofessionseducationscopingreview
AT parkhyeyoungkate microlearninginhealthprofessionseducationscopingreview
AT hallkatherine microlearninginhealthprofessionseducationscopingreview
AT woodwardamanda microlearninginhealthprofessionseducationscopingreview
AT yamanesandra microlearninginhealthprofessionseducationscopingreview
AT kimsangsuk microlearninginhealthprofessionseducationscopingreview