The effects of audience response systems on learning outcomes in health professions education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 21

Medical Teacher

Volumn 34, Issue 6, 2012, Pages

  Nelson, Cody ^a   Hartling, Lisa ^a   Campbell, Sandra ^a   Oswald, Anna E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL COMPETENCE; EDUCATION; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; LEARNING; METHODOLOGY; REVIEW; SELF CONCEPT; VOCATIONAL EDUCATION;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; EDUCATION, PROFESSIONAL; HEALTH PERSONNEL; HUMANS; LEARNING; SELF EFFICACY;

EID: 84861050689     PISSN: 0142159X     EISSN: 1466187X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.680938     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Abrahamson L. 2006. A brief history of networked classrooms: Effects, cases, pedagogy, and implications. In: Banks DA, editor. Audience response systems in higher education: Applications and cases. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. p 25.
2. Alexander CJ, Crescini WM, Juskewitch JE, Lachman N, Pawlina W. 2009. Assessing the integration of audience response system technology in teaching of anatomical sciences. Anat Sci Educ 2(4):160-166.
3. Banks DA, Bateman S. 2004. Audience response systemsin education: Supporting a 'lost in the desert' learning scenario. International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE2004, Acquiring and Constructing Knowledge Through Human-Computer Interaction: Creating New Visions for the Future of Learning), Melbourne.
4. Barbour ME. 2008. Electronic voting in dental materials education: The impact on students' attitudes and exam performance. J Dent Educ 72(9):1042-1047.
5. Berkson L. 1993. Problem-based learning: Have the expectations been met? Acad Med 68(10 Suppl.):79-88.
6. Berry J. 2009. Technology support in nursing education: Clickers in the classroom. Nurs Educ Perspect 30(5):295-298.
7. Cain J, Black EP, Rohr J. 2009. An audience response system strategy to improve student motivation, attention, and feedback. Am J Pharm Educ 73(2):21.
8. Cain J, Robinson E. 2008. A primer on audience response systems: Current applications and future considerations. Am J Pharm Educ 72(4):77.
9. Caldwell JE. 2007. Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sci Educ [Electronic Resource] 6(1):9-20. (Pubitemid 46364411)
10. Distlehorst LH, Dawson E, Robbs RS, Barrows HS. 2005. Problem-based learning outcomes: The glass half-full. Acad Med 80(3):294-299. (Pubitemid 40316124)
11. Doucet M, Vrins A, Harvey D. 2009. Effect of using an audience response system on learning environment, motivation and long-term retention, during case-discussions in a large group of undergraduate veterinary clinical pharmacology students. Med Teach 31(12):e570-e579.
12. Duggan PM, Palmer E, Devitt P. 2007. Electronic voting to encourage interactive lectures: A randomised trial. BMC Med Educ 7:25.
13. Elashvili A, Denehy GE, Dawson DV, Cunningham MA. 2008. Evaluation of an audience response system in a preclinical operative dentistry course. J Dent Educ 72(11):1296-1303.
14. Fies C, Marshall J. 2006. Classroom response systems: A review of the literature. J Sci Educ Technol 15(1):101-109. (Pubitemid 44757013)
15. Forsetlund L, Bjorndal A, Rashidian A, Jamtvedt G, O'Brien MA, Wolf F, Davis D, Odgaard-Jensen J, Oxman AD. 2009. Continuing education meetings and workshops: Effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD003030.
16. Grimes C, Rogers GJ, Volker D, Ramberg E. 2010. Classroom performance system use in an accelerated graduate nursing program. Comput Inform Nurs 28(2):79-85.
17. Halloran L. 1995. A comparison of two methods of teaching. computer managed instruction and keypad questions versus traditional classroom lecture. Comput Nurs 13(6):285-288.
18. Hartling L, Spooner C, Tjosvold L, Oswald A. 2010. Problem-based learning in pre-clinical medical education: 22 years of outcome research. Med Teach 32(1):28-35.
19. Higgins JPT, Green S. 2006. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane Collaboration: Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK.
20. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. 2002. Quantifying heterogeneity in a metaanalysis. Stat Med. 21(11):1539-1558.
21. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. 2003. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327(7414):557-560. (Pubitemid 37088507)
22. Judson E, Sawada D. 2002. Learning from past and present: Electronic response systems in college lecture halls. J Comput Math Sci Teach 21(2):167-181.
23. Kay RH, LeSage A. 2009. A strategic assessment of audience response systems used in higher education. Australas J Educ Technol 25(2):235-249.
24. Kirkpatrick DL, Kirkpatrick JD. 2006. Evaluating training programs: The four levels. 3rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
25. Liu FC, Gettig JP, Fjortoft N. 2010. Impact of a student response system on short- and long-term learning in a drug literature evaluation course. Am J Pharm Educ 74(1):6.
26. Lymn JS, Mostyn A. 2009. Use of audience response technology to engage non-medical prescribing students in pharmacology. ICERI2009 Proceedings, 16 to 18 November 2009 Madrid, Madrid, Spain, pp. 4518-4524.
27. MacArthur JR, Jones LL. 2008. A review of literature reports of clickers applicable to college chemistry classrooms. Chem Educ Res Pract 9(3):187-195.
28. Miller RG, Ashar BH, Getz KJ. 2003. Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing education of health professionals. J Contin Educ Health Prof 23(2):109-115.
29. Morrison A, Moulton K, Clark M, Polisena J, Fiander M, Mierzwinski-Urban M, Mensinkai S, Clifford T, Hutton B. 2009. English-language restriction when conducting systematic review-based meta-analyses: Systematic review of published studies. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health.
30. Moser LR, Kalus JS, Brubaker C. 2010. Evaluation of an audience response system on pharmacy student test performance. Unpublished manuscript.
31. O'Brien TE, Wang W, Medvedev I, Wile MZ, Nosek TM. 2006. Use of a computerized audience response system in medical student teaching: Its effect on exam performance. Med Teach 28(8):736-738.
32. Palmer, E J, and Devitt, P G. 2007. Assessment of higher order cognitive skills in undergraduate education: Modified essay or multiple choice questions? Research paper, BMC Medical Education, 2007, 7:49 [Accessed 26 April 2010] http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472- 6920/7/49.
33. Palmer EJ, Devitt PG, De Young NJ, Morris D. 2005. Assessment of an electronic voting system within the tutorial setting: A randomised controlled trial. BMC Med Educ 5(1):24.
34. Patterson B, Kilpatrick J, Woebkenberg E. 2009. Evidence for teaching practice: The impact of clickers. Nurse Educ Today, 30(7):603-607.
35. Plant JD. 2007. Incorporating an audience response system into veterinary dermatology lectures: Effect on student knowledge retention and satisfaction. J Vet Med Educ 34(5):674-677. (Pubitemid 351628872)
36. Poulis J, Massen C, Robens E, Gilbert M. 1998. Physics lecturing with audience paced feedback. Am J Phys 66(5):439-441.
37. Pradhan A, Sparano D, Ananth CV. 2005. The influence of an audience response system on knowledge retention: An application to resident education. Am J Obstet Gynecol 193(5):1827-1830. (Pubitemid 41540499)
38. Roschelle J, Penuel WR, Abrahamson L. 2004. The networked classroom. Educ Leadersh 61(5):50-54. (Pubitemid 38284402)
39. Rubio EI, Bassignani MJ, White MA, Brant WE. 2008. Effect of an audience response system on resident learning and retention of lecture material. AJR. Am J Roentgenol 190(6):W319-W322. (Pubitemid 351798520)
40. Schackow TE, Chavez M, Loya L, Friedman M. 2004. Audience response system: Effect on learning in family medicine residents. Fam Med 36(7):496-504. (Pubitemid 38924649)
41. Schmidt HG, Dauphinee WD, Patel VL. 1987. Comparing the effects of problem-based and conventional curricula in an international sample. J Med Educ 62(4):305-315. (Pubitemid 17067890)
42. Schmidt HG, Machiels-Bongaerts M, Hermans H, Ten Cate TJ, Venekamp R, Boshuizen HPA. 1996. The development of diagnostic competence: Comparison of a problem-based, an integrated, and a conventional medical curriculum. Acad Med 71(6):658-664. (Pubitemid 126481543)
43. Simpson V, Oliver M. 2007. Electronic voting systems for lectures then and now: A comparison of research and practice. Australas J Educ Technol 23(2):187-208.
44. Slain D, Abate M, Hodges BM, Stamatakis MK, Wolak S. 2004. An interactive response system to promote active learning in the doctor of pharmacy curriculum. Am J Pharm Educ 68(5):1-9. (Pubitemid 40340760)
45. Stein PS, Challman SD, Brueckner JK. 2006. Using audience response technology for pretest reviews in an undergraduate nursing course. J Nurs Educ 45(11):469-473. (Pubitemid 44785499)
46. Tamblyn R, Abrahamowicz M, Dauphinee D, Girard N, Bartlett G, Grand'Maison P. 2005. Effect of a community oriented problem based learning curriculum on quality of primary care delivered by graduates: Historical cohort comparison study. BMJ 331(7523):1002.
47. Vernon DT, Blake RL. 1993. Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Acad Med 68(7):550-563. (Pubitemid 23209488)
48. Wells, GA, Shea, B, O'Connell, D, Peterson, J, Welch, V, Losos, M, Tugwell, P. 2011. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, [Accessed 26 April 2010] http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical- epidemiology/oxford.asp