Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Apr 1;98(4):521-530.
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005119. Epub 2022 Dec 12.

Questions of Well-Being and Inclusion in Online Undergraduate Medical Education During COVID-19: A 2-Phased Focused Scoping Review

Affiliations

Questions of Well-Being and Inclusion in Online Undergraduate Medical Education During COVID-19: A 2-Phased Focused Scoping Review

Anna MacLeod et al. Acad Med. .

Abstract

Purpose: Undergraduate medical education (UGME) was transformed by the rapid move to online curriculum delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. Most research on online UGME has focused on measuring its effectiveness. However, medical educators also require evidence regarding its implications with respect to well-being and inclusion.

Method: To explore online learning transition, particularly the effect on well-being and inclusion, this 2-phased focused scoping review employed a revised Joanna Briggs Institute approach: (1) developing review questions and objectives; (2) determining eligibility criteria; (3) developing the search strategy; (4) extracting, analyzing, and discussing findings; (5) drawing conclusions; and (6) discussing implications for practice and further research.

Results: The review ultimately included 217 articles, of which 107 (49%) explored student and staff well-being during online UGME, 64 (30%) focused on inclusion in this context, and 46 (21%) examined both well-being and inclusion. Additionally, 137 of included articles (63%) were research/evaluation, 48 (22%) were descriptive, and 32 (15%) were opinion. Of the 137 research/evaluation studies, 115 (84%) were quantitative, 10 (7%) were qualitative, 8 (6%) were mixed methods, and 4 (3%) were Reviews. Among these research/evaluation studies, the most commonly used data collection method was surveys (n = 120), followed by academic tests (n = 14). Other methods included interviews (n = 6), focus groups (n = 4), written reflections (n = 3), user data (n = 1), and blood tests (n = 1).

Conclusions: Important questions remain regarding the safety and inclusiveness of online learning spaces and approaches, particularly for members of historically excluded groups and learners in low-resource settings. More rigorous, theoretically informed research in online medical education is required to better understand the social implications of online medical education, including more in-depth, qualitative investigations about well-being and inclusion and more strategies for ensuring online spaces are safe, inclusive, and supportive.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Yardley S, Teunissen PW, Dornan T. Experiential learning: AMEE guide no. 63. Med Teach. 2012;34:e102–e115.
    1. MacLeod A, Cameron P, Kits O, Tummons J. Technologies of exposure: Videoconferenced distributed medical education as a sociomaterial practice. Acad Med. 2019;94:412–418.
    1. Darras KE, Spouge R, Hatala R, et al. Integrated virtual and cadaveric dissection laboratories enhance first year medical students’ anatomy experience: A pilot study. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19:1–6.
    1. Cook DA, Garside S, Levinson AJ, Dupras DM, Montori VM. What do we mean by web-based learning? A systematic review of the variability of interventions. Med Educ. 2010;44:765–774.
    1. MacLeod A, Kits O, Mann K, Tummons J, Wilson KW. The invisible work of distributed medical education: Exploring the contributions of audiovisual professionals, administrative professionals and faculty teachers. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2017;22:623–638.

Reference cited only in Figure 1

    1. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.

Publication types