Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning

Objectives: Current US medical students have begun to rely on electronic information repositories—such as UpToDate, AccessMedicine, and Wikipedia—for their pre-clerkship medical education. However, it is unclear whether these resources are appropriate for this level of learning due to factors involv...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dinara Saparova, Nathanial S. Nolan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University Library System, University of Pittsburgh 2016-01-01
Series:Journal of the Medical Library Association
Subjects:
Online Access:http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/360
id doaj-782bc99a632843219cfe366e9de258db
record_format Article
spelling doaj-782bc99a632843219cfe366e9de258db2020-11-24T21:35:57ZengUniversity Library System, University of PittsburghJournal of the Medical Library Association1536-50501558-94392016-01-011041205Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learningDinara Saparova0Nathanial S. Nolan1School of Information Science and Learning Technologies, University of Missouri, 111 London Hall, Columbia, MO 65211School of Medicine, University of Missouri, One Hospital Drive, MA204, DC018.00, Columbia, MO 65212Objectives: Current US medical students have begun to rely on electronic information repositories—such as UpToDate, AccessMedicine, and Wikipedia—for their pre-clerkship medical education. However, it is unclear whether these resources are appropriate for this level of learning due to factors involving information quality, level of evidence, and the requisite knowledgebase. This study evaluated appropriateness of electronic information resources from a novel perspective: amount of mental effort learners invest in interactions with these resources and effects of the experienced mental effort on learning. Methods: Eighteen first-year medical students read about three unstudied diseases in the abovementioned resources (a total of fifty-four observations). Their eye movement characteristics (i.e., fixation duration, fixation count, visit duration, and task-evoked pupillary response) were recorded and used as psychophysiological indicators of the experienced mental effort. Post reading, students’ learning was assessed with multiple-choice tests. Eye metrics and test results constituted quantitative data analyzed according to the repeated Latin square design. Students’ perceptions of interacting with the information resources were also collected. Participants’ feedback during semi-structured interviews constituted qualitative data and was reviewed, transcribed, and open coded for emergent themes. Results: Compared to AccessMedicine and Wikipedia, UpToDate was associated with significantly higher values of eye metrics, suggesting learners experienced higher mental effort. No statistically significant difference between the amount of mental effort and learning outcomes was found. More so, descriptive statistical analysis of the knowledge test scores suggested similar levels of learning regardless of the information resource used. Conclusions: Judging by the learning outcomes, all three information resources were found appropriate for learning. UpToDate, however, when used alone, may be less appropriate for first-year medical students’ learning as it does not fully address their information needs and is more demanding in terms of cognitive resources invested.http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/360Medical Education, Problem-Based Learning, Information-Seeking Behavior, Hypermedia, Reading, Information Science
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Dinara Saparova
Nathanial S. Nolan
spellingShingle Dinara Saparova
Nathanial S. Nolan
Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
Journal of the Medical Library Association
Medical Education, Problem-Based Learning, Information-Seeking Behavior, Hypermedia, Reading, Information Science
author_facet Dinara Saparova
Nathanial S. Nolan
author_sort Dinara Saparova
title Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
title_short Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
title_full Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
title_fullStr Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
title_sort evaluating the appropriateness of electronic information resources for learning
publisher University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
series Journal of the Medical Library Association
issn 1536-5050
1558-9439
publishDate 2016-01-01
description Objectives: Current US medical students have begun to rely on electronic information repositories—such as UpToDate, AccessMedicine, and Wikipedia—for their pre-clerkship medical education. However, it is unclear whether these resources are appropriate for this level of learning due to factors involving information quality, level of evidence, and the requisite knowledgebase. This study evaluated appropriateness of electronic information resources from a novel perspective: amount of mental effort learners invest in interactions with these resources and effects of the experienced mental effort on learning. Methods: Eighteen first-year medical students read about three unstudied diseases in the abovementioned resources (a total of fifty-four observations). Their eye movement characteristics (i.e., fixation duration, fixation count, visit duration, and task-evoked pupillary response) were recorded and used as psychophysiological indicators of the experienced mental effort. Post reading, students’ learning was assessed with multiple-choice tests. Eye metrics and test results constituted quantitative data analyzed according to the repeated Latin square design. Students’ perceptions of interacting with the information resources were also collected. Participants’ feedback during semi-structured interviews constituted qualitative data and was reviewed, transcribed, and open coded for emergent themes. Results: Compared to AccessMedicine and Wikipedia, UpToDate was associated with significantly higher values of eye metrics, suggesting learners experienced higher mental effort. No statistically significant difference between the amount of mental effort and learning outcomes was found. More so, descriptive statistical analysis of the knowledge test scores suggested similar levels of learning regardless of the information resource used. Conclusions: Judging by the learning outcomes, all three information resources were found appropriate for learning. UpToDate, however, when used alone, may be less appropriate for first-year medical students’ learning as it does not fully address their information needs and is more demanding in terms of cognitive resources invested.
topic Medical Education, Problem-Based Learning, Information-Seeking Behavior, Hypermedia, Reading, Information Science
url http://jmla.pitt.edu/ojs/jmla/article/view/360
work_keys_str_mv AT dinarasaparova evaluatingtheappropriatenessofelectronicinformationresourcesforlearning
AT nathanialsnolan evaluatingtheappropriatenessofelectronicinformationresourcesforlearning
_version_ 1725943154182455296