Evaluation of an online, case-based interactive approach to teaching pathophysiology

Figures & data

Table

Practice points
•A web based interaction with the students prior to a classroom lecture enhances their active participation during the lecture.
•The study of clinical cases on the web linked to an online activity (choosing lab tests) promotes a deeper forethought of the case.
•The fact that the lecturer knows decisions made by students facing a clinical case, before the classroom lecture, helps him to understand their way of thinking and subsequently to drive the discussion during the face-to-face teaching.

Figure 1. Procedure.

Table 1.  Ratings of the students who went on the website

	Year 1		Year 2
	n	%	n	%	p
(1) Did you ask for laboratory tests as requested?					ns
Yes	44	83	73	91.3
No	9	17	7	8.7
(2) Did you print the case studies?					0.013
Yes	39	73.6	41	51.2
No	14	26.4	38	47.5
(3) Was the work on internet stimulating?					0.004
Strongly agree	23	43.4	57	71.3
Agree	23	43.4	18	22.5
Disagree	4	7.5	2	2.4
Strongly disagree	1	1.9	1	1.3
Unknown	2	3.8	2	2.4
(4) Did the work on internet motivate you to independent learning?					ns
Strongly agree	22	41.5	31	38.8
Agree	18	34.0	33	41.3
Disagree	6	11.3	11	13.7
Strongly disagree	5	9.4	5	6.2
Unknown	1	1.9	0	0
(5) Was the case preparation on internet useful for understanding the  clinical significance of laboratory tests?					ns
Strongly agree	16	30.3	23	28.7
Agree	28	52.8	47	58.8
Disagree	4	7.5	4	5.0
Strongly disagree	0	0	0	0
Unknown	5	9.4	6	7.5
(6) Was the complexity of the clinical cases appropriate for your knowledge?					ns
Strongly agree	17	32.1	31	38.8
Agree	29	54.7	46	57.5
Disagree	3	5.7	1	1.3
Strongly disagree	2	3.7	0	0
Unknown	2	3.7	2	2.4
(7) Were the online procedures easy to follow?					ns
Strongly agree	41	77.4	70	87.5
Agree	10	18.9	9	11.3
Disagree	1	1.8	0	0
Strongly disagree	0	0	1	1.2
Unknown	1	1.8	0	0

Table 2.  Number of students who visited the website

	Year 1		Year 2
	n	%	n	%	p
1. Students who visited the website (count based on web server statistics)	66.5*	–	94.75*	–
2. Students who visited the website (count based on the evaluation form)	53	67.9	80	84.2
3. Students who didn’t visit the website	25	32.1	15	15.8
Total of 2 + 3	78	100	95	100	0.01

*Represents the average of visits recorded by the web server for the 4 cases that were analysed.

Figure 2. Fractions of students having answered by « Strongly agree », « Agree», « Disagree», « Strongly disagree » or « Unknown », to the questions « Was the interactive session really interactive ? » (Question 1) and « Did you enjoy the interactive session ? » (Question 2). In A are shown the answers of students who have experienced the e-learning and in B those of students who did not study the cases on the web.

Table 3.  Spontaneous hand-written comments

	Year 1		Year 2
	n	%	n	%
Positive comments	59	69.4	61	74.4
Negative comments	14	16.5	14	17.1