Table 2 Summary of intervention and results of the included studies
From: Digital learning designs in occupational therapy education: a scoping review
Author Year | Intervention | Results |
|---|---|---|
Barillas 2019 [25] | Experimental group: 3D anatomy software + on-campus class (4-hour lecture, 4-hour laboratory time) Control group: taken a course without use of anatomy software Duration: 1 semester | Course grades: higher overall final course grades in experimental group compared to the control group, but not statistically significant (p > 0.05); no statistically significant differences in lecture and laboratory exam grades between two groups (p = 0.891, p = 0.507, respectively) Usefulness: 82 of students reported the use of the anatomy software to be helpful in understanding course concepts. Course grade differences: no statistically significant among the different learning styles or age groups (p > 0.05) |
Howard 2019 [26] | Blended group: F2F sessions (lectures, lab activities) + online sessions (videos, reading assignments, group work, online forum) via LMS F2F group: traditional lecture and lab, with learning activities Duration: 1 semester | Summative course grades: statistically significantly higher in F2F group Qualitative analysis - Students’ perception on online hybrid section: the course required more busywork. - Priori themes: value of theory and growth in theory application - Emergent themes: use of theory for professional reasoning, client-centered practice, theory integration in practice, and theory in the OT process |
Simons et al. 2002 [27] | Experimental group: F2F sessions + online sessions (lectures, presentations, web sites links, and discussion, assignments) via LMS; Web-Course-In-a-Box Duration: 1 semester | Online learning experience: students reported that it was efficient, effective, and satisfactory, as previously expected. ASCT: increased significantly during the semester only in OT course (word processing: p = 0.000, e-mail: p = 0.013, use of the Web: p = 0.025) Qualitative analysis - Efficiency, effectiveness, and satisfaction of online learning are a product of the interaction between the individual student factors, remote learning environment factors, and course design and instructor factors. |
Grant 2019 [28] | Experimental group: Game-based technology during a class to encourage the engagement with practical aspects of equipment use and fitting, Individual and group game missions Duration: 3-hour | Students’ perception of game-based learning - Extremely high student engagement and increased confidence in practicing using adaptive equipment - Students perceived that the game-based technology is useful tool to get knowledge about adaptive equipment. Qualitative analysis - Students mentioned that game-based learning allowed them to experience autonomy and competition. |
Lin et al. 2021 [29] | Smart class group: online teaching information platform ; pre-class (requirements, studying materials), in-class (theoretical class: discussion, questions, and answers/ practical class: practice and discussion) after- class (assignments, group discussion, extracurricular studying resources) Traditional class group: F2F teaching (theoretical class + practical class) Duration: 1 semester | Course scores: no significant difference in final score between two groups (p = 0.874); higher assignment score and practical exam score in the smart class group than those in the traditional class group (p = 0.017, p = 0.040, respectively) Pre-class preview, in-class learning, after-class review: no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05, all) Course satisfaction: no significant difference between two groups (p > 0.05) Students’ questionnaire survey and teachers’ interview: preference for combining the two learning methods (smart class module for the theory class + traditional class for the practical class) |
Power et al. 2020 [30] | Online group: online CPT program at the computer lab on campus (text and audio information, video demonstration for SCA training) F2F group: CPT training from a presenter at the standard lecture theatre Control group: attended lectures not related to this topic and, completed the online CPT program after the study Duration: 45-min | AASK - Compared with the control group, significantly higher knowledge of aphasia in online and F2F groups (online vs. control: p = 0.000; F2F vs. control: p = 0.002), knowledge of facilitative strategies (online vs. control: p = 0.000; F2F vs. control: p = 0.002), and positive attitudes towards aphasia (online vs. control: p = 0.031; F2F versus control: p = 0.032) - No significant difference between the online and F2F groups for the total or any subtotals (p = 1.000) |
Carbonaro et al. 2008 [31] | F2F group: student manual and interprofessional team discussion on complex case scenarios Blended group: F2F sessions + online sessions (synchronous virtual classroom and asynchronous interactions; library resources, video clips, download notes and assignments, submit work via LMS) Duration: 5 weeks | Interprofessional team attitudes, knowledge, and skill: no significant differences in communication and teamwork, interprofessional relationship, interprofessional learning, interprofessional interaction between groups (p = 0.376, p = 0.769, p = 0.174, p = 0.462, respectively) Team dynamic: no observable differences between the groups; comparable performance before and after global rating and overall competence in the groups Qualitative analysis - Achievement of course learning objectives perceived by students: a more positive achievement in the blended learning class (collaborating effectively as a healthcare member) |
MartÃn-Valero et al. 2021 [32] | Experimental group: university training with MOOC (videos for brief theoretical explanation, clinical cases, and discussion forums for analysis, professional reasoning) Control group: only university training without MOOC Duration: unspecified | Academic performance: statistically significant differences between the groups in favor of the MOOC Evaluation rubric after MOOC: quite good result in MOOC group (X = 21; SD = 6.88, out of a maximum of 36 points) MOOC and empathy: statistically significant differences between the pre and post empathy scores (X = − 11.71; SD = 11.36; t (173) = − 13.68, p < 0.001) with a high effect size (d = 0.86) Structural equation model: the higher the realization and participation in MOOC, the higher the academic performance, and cognitive and affective empathy |
Henderson et al. 2020 [33] | Flipped course group: pre-class activities (online lectures, readings, learning activity via online discussion board, etc.) + in-class activities (role playing, case studies, and collaborative group work for active application of learned knowledge) Collaborative group: involved in course design; meeting weekly with the researcher for creation of feedback, comments and opinions on the flipped course Duration: 1 semester | APLOS: significant growth in both groups, no differences between the groups at post-course SACRR: similar professional reasoning skills in both groups at post-course, no significant differences (Hotelling’s T, F = 1.240, p < 0.333) PMQ: significant differences (Hotelling’s T, F = + 2.745, p < 0.011) on 3 of 18 items; the collaborative group showed more metacognitive learning characteristics. Qualitative analysis - Experienced growth in active learning, professional reasoning, and change in student engagement in both groups - Additional benefits of development of relationships, increased accountability, and improved metacognitive learning in collaborative group |
Jedlicka et al. 2002 [34] | Experimental group: applying and synthesizing lecture content to cases while rotating 3 online educational methods - Two-way interactive video and audio group - Chat room group - Independent learning group: independent case assignments - Three groups: lectures, discussions, and lab experiences using two-way interaction LMS; WebCT before case application training Duration: 1 semester | Exam of student’s performance: no significant difference between three groups (p = 0.11) Student preference for instructional methods: 77% of students prefer two-way interactive video and audio Qualitative analysis - Activation of interaction and communication between learners is important for effective education through distance learning. - Higher skills of faculty members for various skills are required. |
Thomas et al. 2005 [35] | Experimental group: online fieldwork education via LMS; WebCT - Post messages (clinical setting, OT roles, client case history) on bulletin board by students and participating in virtual discussions - Monitoring discussion boards by instructors Duration: 6 weeks | Participation - 95% (40/42) general login to the discussion board - 92.5% (37/40) of the participating students actually read the postings - 87.5% (35/40) posted at least 1 item on the bulletin board Qualitative analysis - Majority of the students’ postings: knowledge, comprehension, application - Beneficial effects of participation in WebCT during fieldwork: student learning and achievement of stage 1 learning objectives by supporting students in peer learning, improving student autonomy, supporting self-directed learning and stimulating higherorder thinking |
Myers et al. 2015 [36] | Experimental group: online interprofessional skill training via LMS; Blackboard - Case study assignments, blogs for online discussions, and multimedia content (web resources, videos, and peer-reviewed literature) - Small group activities (development of goals, intervention plans, and recommendations for caregivers and school personnel) Duration: 1 semester | Qualitative analysis - Students perceived that their understanding and knowledge of other disciplines’ roles on the team increased. - Students felt more comfortable with the idea of collaborating with other disciplines. - Problem solving and decision-making were improved through factual knowledge about content and the process of applying it. - Students recognized critically analyzing and evaluating viewpoints as the most positive aspect of learning through this course. Use of multimedia resources: highly rated in course feedback |
Kim et al. 2022 [37] | F2F group: 4-session lectures on DLW and wrap-up + small group discussion on video case scenarios, single-day Online group: prerecorded DLW sessions + asynchronous discussion forums (same content as F2F delivered) Duration: 8-hour | Knowledge changes regarding the DLW framework: no significant differences in at the 3 time points; pre, post, follow-up between the groups (p = 0.57 to p = 0.99) Factors influencing DLW adoption: significant differences between the groups at posttest in favor of the F2F group (p = 0.001) Satisfaction with the workshop: significant differences between the groups at posttest in favor of the F2F group (p < 0.001) Qualitative analysis - Relevance to their practices and interests may improve learning, a familiar learning environment may facilitate learning. - F2F workshop is valuable in the learning process. - Flexibility in web-based learning can be both beneficial and challenging; participants expressed web-based learning lacked in-person-like interactions. |
Barnard-Ashton et al., 2017 [38] | Experimental group: F2F sessions (problem scenario introduction, mid-problem tutorials, and problem feedback) + online activities (podcasts, online discussion forums, live video calling, open source VLE, etc) Duration: 1 semester course for 6 years | Qualitative analysis - Lecturers and students noted improved communication, curriculum transparency and efficient use of time and paper resources, which in turn accommodates the student’s need for instant gratification. - Students felt reassured that they had the correct information and any-time access to all communication resulting in the use of blended learning becoming part of their study habits. - Lecturers perceived success in seeing students actively engaged with blended learning activities and evidence that blended learning was contributing to improved pass rates. |
Murphy et al. 2018 [39] | Experimental group: online videos of cases in real clinical setting and student discussion on professional reasoning in class, out-of-class assignments (small group and individual) Control group: written case studies using a textbook and student discussion on professional reasoning in class, text-based case study assignments (small group and individual) Duration: 1 semester | HSRT - Experimental group (pre-post): statistically significant changes in overall score, percentile, induction, deduction, and evaluation (p < 0.05); but, not statistically significant in analysis and inference - Control group (pre-post): no statistical significance in all items - Comparison: statistically significant difference in inductive reasoning skill (p = 0.03); but no significant difference in the other items |
Gee et al. 2017 [40] | Experimental group: professional reasoning process using A SECRET module - Simulated case scenario via multimedia (video, audio, and text) - Multiple choice assessment related to each of the 7 elements of A SECRET via LMS Duration: 1 semester | Evaluation of teaching professional reasoning process (A SECRET): overall average score 68% in the strategy achievement, positive findings in novelty of the instruction, assessment, and the content |
Mitchell et al. 2009 [41] | Experimental group: online independent study - Reading assignments about OPPM - Written objective examination - Submission of responses to case questions and feedback via LMS; Blackboard - Completion of critical reasoning journals Duration: 1 semester | The effectiveness of online assignments on enhancing awareness and use of professional reasoning skills: more than 40% of each type of reasoning on the WGCTA by students. Students’ perceptions of the use of professional reasoning: SR is the most used in each part of the assignment Primary factors in using reasoning type: the type of information being considered, the actions required by the question, and the student’s innate style and previous experiences |
Feldhacker et al. 2022 [42] | F2F group: all lectures and labs on campus Hybrid group: recorded lectures and class sessions (synchronously or asynchronously) + only attended labs and experiential learning components on campus - Both group: use the active learning strategies in class sessions (group discussions, think-pair-share, polling, quizzes, reciprocal questioning, and others), online activities (Flipgrid, Padlet, online quizzes, and discussion posts). Duration: 1 semester | Achievement of learning course objectives and acquisition of knowledge: significant improvement in both groups from pre- to posttest (p < 0.05); no statistically significant differences between groups at pre- or posttest Qualitative analysis - Students reported the effectiveness of course design (active learning strategies) regardless of course delivery method and strongly favored assignments and learning activitieslinked to real-life experiences. |
Banning et al. 2021 [43] | Hybrid pathway: F2F (47% of the total credit hours, on-campus and community-based labs, service-learning experiences, and fieldwork) + online delivery (53% of the total credit hours, online lectures, exams, and synchronous online delivery lab) F2F pathway: only F2F elements (lectures, labs, learning activities) Duration: unspecified | Perceived preparedness for the certification exam or to enter the workforce: no significant difference between the groups Sense of belonging, skills learned throughout the program, practice settings or leadership roles held after graduation: no significant differences between the groups The number of state occupational therapy associations: significantly greater number of hybrid alumni |
Lewis-Kipkulei et al. 2021 [44] | Experimental group: pre-class (assigned readings, guiding questions, and research topics) + in-class (peer collaboration, student-led discussion, and peer teaching) Duration: 1 semester | Qualitative analysis - Flipped classroom has a positive impact on peer interaction and collaboration. - Flipped classroom provides students more individualized time. - The learning model had a positive impact on encouraging higher student engagement. - Learning through discussion was much more valuable than traditional lecture courses. - The course was more student-focused, supporting independent learning. |
Benaroya et al. 2021 [45] | Experimental group: OTA online education using active learning strategies - Synchronous virtual classroom platform: flipped classroom, think-pair-share and jigsaw technique using breakout rooms, polling and student response systems, muddiest point via chat box, lab kits, - LMS: 1-minute paper using discussion forums, student-generated video Duration: 2 semesters | Helpfulness of each strategy: breakout room and chat box feature of the synchronous virtual classroom, lab kits were perceived as most helpful, whereas student-generated videos and one-minute papers were perceived as least helpful |
Provident et al. 2015 [46] | Experimental group: online OTD program via LMS; Moodle - Assignments related to each student’s professional interest/practice - Ongoing discussion forums by instructors - Reflective writing activities and peer review processes - Implementation of the capstone project - 2 campus visits for leadership course, presentation of capstone projects Duration: 4 semesters | Qualitative analysis -Students had multiple opportunities for critical reflection and discourse throughout the program; students experienced professional uneasiness or a dilemma. - Students reflected that the program’s cohort structure allows for the sharing and interaction of experiences with instructors and other students. - Capstone projects provided active learning in each student’s unique worksite making the personal transformation more evident to the student. - Students reported increased confidence in their new roles and increased awareness of positive change after completing the OTD program. |