References
- Ally M. 2009. Mobile learning: transforming the delivery of education and training. Canada: AU Press.
- Beetham H, Sharpe R. 2013. Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age. Designing for 21st century learning. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
- Bickerdike S, Whittle SR, Pickering JD. 2014. Do lecture audio-recordings support engagement and flexible learning? Med Educ. 48:522–523.
- Bullock A. 2014. Does technology help doctors to access, use and share knowledge? Med Educ. 48:28–33.
- Chen B, Denoyelles A. 2013. Exploring students’ mobile learning practices in higher education; [cited 2015 Dec 3]. Available from: http://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/10/exploring-students-mobile-learning-practices-in-higher-education.
- Cook DA, Ellaway RH. 2015. Evaluating technology-enhanced learning: a comprehensive framework. Med Teach. 37:961–970.
- Frenk J, Chen L, Bhutta ZA, Cohen J, Crisp N, Evans T, Fineberg H, Garcia P, Ke Y, Kelley P, et al. 2015. Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. Lancet. 376:1923–1958.
- Frye AW, Hemmer PA. 2012. Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE Guide No. 67. Med Teach. 34:e288–e299.
- Fuller R, Joynes V. 2015. Should mobile learning be compulsory for preparing students for learning in the workplace? Br J Educ Technol. 46:153–158.
- Hake RR. 1998. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: a six-thousand-student survey of mechanics tests data for introductory physics courses. Am J Phys. 66:64–74.
- Holton EF. 1996. The flawed four-level evaluation model. Hum Resour Dev Quart. 7:5–21.
- Issa N, Schuller M, Santacaterina S, Shapiro M, Wang E, Mayer RE, DaRosa DA. 2011. Applying multimedia design principles enhances learning in medical education. Med Educ. 45:818–826.
- Joynes V, Fuller R. 2016. Legitimisation, personalisation and maturation: using the experiences of a compulsory mobile curriculum to reconceptualise mobile learning. Med Teach. 38:621–627.
- Kirkpatrick DL. 1994. Evaluating training programs: the four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehlar.
- Kirkpatrick DL. 2010. The New World Kirkpatrick Model. Retrieved May 2016. Available from: http://www.kirkpatrickpartners.com/OurPhilosophy/TheNewWorldKirkpatrickModel/tabid/303/.
- Koehler N. 2012. Medical students’ use of and attitudes towards medical applications. J Mob Technol Med. 1:16–21.
- Laurillard D. 2007. Modelling benefits-oriented costs for technology enhanced learning. High Educ. 54:21–39.
- Lumsden CJ, Byrne-Davis LMT, Mooney JS, Sandars J. 2015. Using mobile devices for teaching and learning in clinical medicine. Arch Dis Child Educ Pract Ed. doi: 10.1136/archdischild-2014-306620.
- Lupton D. 2015. Digital sociology. London: Routledge.
- Pickering JD. 2015a. Anatomy drawing screencasts: enabling flexible learning for medical students. Anat Sci Educ. 8:249–257.
- Pickering JD. 2015b. Introduction of an anatomy eBook enhances assessment outcomes. Med Educ. 49:522–523.
- Sclater N. 2015. Code of practice for learning analytics. JISC. [cited 2015 Dec 8]. Available from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/code-of-practice-for-learning-analytics.
- Wallace S, Clark M, White J. 2012. 'It's on my iPhone': attitudes to the use of mobile computing devices in medical education, a mixed-methods study. BMJ Open. 2: e001099. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001099.
- Walsh K, Levin H, Jaye P, Gazzard J. 2013. Cost analyses approaches in medical education: there are no simple solutions. Med Educ. 47:962–968.
- Yardley S, Dornan T. 2012. Kirkpatrick's levels and education ‘evidence’. Med Educ. 46:97–106.