Dear Sir
Though being rather expensive, offering textbooks as online available PDF copies (“PDF e-books”) has increased. In a prospective, cluster-randomised trial with 269 medical students attending our course on basic medical pharmacology in 2007 and 2008 we tested for acceptance and use of PDF e-books, attitudes towards e-learning and results in a final written exam.
Half of our students were assigned to use the PDF e-books (“users”) as an add-on to our pharmacology teaching while the others were asked to do not (“non-users”). PDF e-book use obviously was affiliated to the course but low (median: <1h/week). Time spent on print-media was significantly higher (≥3h/week). Compared to non-users, time spent on print-media was similar (during the course) or even higher (period between end of course and final exam). Attitudes towards e-learning obtained by a previously validated questionnaire did not differ between users and non-users and did not change during the study. Test results obtained by users in the final written exam (40 multiple-choice questions) tended to be higher (median 31 vs. 30 correct answers, p<0.08, calculated effect size 0.27). Interestingly, the online offer obviously affected local sales figures of the printed pharmacology textbook that has been available online: while 3.4 books per month were sold during the online offer, sales figures were only 1.1/month before and after offering this book online as a PDF. No effects on sales figures were seen with comparable pharmacology textbooks that were not available online. Thus, students might have used the online offer as a kind of decision support to gain help with their choice which print-copy of a textbook to buy.
In summary, our study on an additional online offer of medical textbooks as PDF e-books does not reveal a substantial use albeit connected to a particular course. General attitude towards Computer-based Learning was not affected. Students assigned to use our PDF e-book offer spent more time on learning in total what might have caused a marginal, yet non-significant benefit regarding a final written multiple-choice exam. Since it is rather expensive to offer access to this simple kind of e-learning and the publisher otherwise might profit by boosted sales figures of his (print) products, it seems unlikely that for libraries or universities this expenditure is worth being made.
Jan Matthes and Stefan Herzig, Department of Pharmacology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. E-mail: [email protected]
Elisabeth Müller, German National Library of Medicine ZB MED, Cologne, Germany, Christoph Stosch, Dean's Office for Student Affairs, Medical Faculty, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany