Development and evaluation of a Health Record Online Submission Tool (HOST)

Digital Health Training Programs for Medical Students: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Medical schools worldwide are accelerating the introduction of digital health courses into their curricula. The COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to this swift and widespread transition to digital health and education. However, the need for digital health competencies goes beyond the COVID-19 pandemic because they are becoming essential for the delivery of effective, efficient, and safe care.

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to collate and analyze studies evaluating digital health education for medical students to inform the development of future courses and identify areas where curricula may need to be strengthened.

METHODS

We carried out a scoping review by following the guidance of the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the results were reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines. We searched 6 major bibliographic databases and gray literature sources for articles published between January 2000 and November 2019. Two authors independently screened the retrieved citations and extracted the data from the included studies. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus discussions between the authors. The findings were analyzed using thematic analysis and presented narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies focusing on different digital courses were included in this review. Most of the studies (22/34, 65%) were published between 2010 and 2019 and originated in the United States (20/34, 59%). The reported digital health courses were mostly elective (20/34, 59%), were integrated into the existing curriculum (24/34, 71%), and focused mainly on medical informatics (17/34, 50%). Most of the courses targeted medical students from the first to third year (17/34, 50%), and the duration of the courses ranged from 1 hour to 3 academic years. Most of the studies (22/34, 65%) reported the use of blended education. A few of the studies (6/34, 18%) delivered courses entirely digitally by using online modules, offline learning, massive open online courses, and virtual patient simulations. The reported courses used various assessment approaches such as paper-based assessments, in-person observations, and online assessments. Most of the studies (30/34, 88%) evaluated courses mostly by using an uncontrolled before-and-after design and generally reported improvements in students' learning outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital health courses reported in literature are mostly elective, focus on a single area of digital health, and lack robust evaluation. They have diverse delivery, development, and assessment approaches. There is an urgent need for high-quality studies that evaluate digital health education.

Training medical students and residents in the use of electronic health records: a systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Our objectives were to identify educational interventions designed to equip medical students or residents with knowledge or skills related to various uses of electronic health records (EHRs), summarize and synthesize the results of formal evaluations of these initiatives, and compare the aims of these initiatives with the prescribed EHR-specific competencies for undergraduate and postgraduate medical education.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta Analyses) guidelines. We searched for English-language, peer-reviewed studies across 6 databases using a combination of Medical Subject Headings and keywords. We summarized the quantitative and qualitative results of included studies and rated studies according to the Best Evidence in Medical Education system.

RESULTS

Our search yielded 619 citations, of which 11 studies were included. Seven studies involved medical students, 3 studies involved residents, and 1 study involved both groups. All interventions used a practical component involving entering information into a simulated or prototypical EHR. None of the interventions involved extracting, aggregating, or visualizing clinical data for panels of patients or specific populations.

DISCUSSION

This review reveals few high-quality initiatives focused on training learners to engage with EHRs for both individual patient care and population health improvement. In comparing these interventions with the broad set of electronic records competencies expected of matriculating physicians, critical gaps in undergraduate and postgraduate medical education remain.

CONCLUSIONS

With the increasing adoption of EHRs and rise of competency-based medical education, educators should address the gaps in the training of future physicians to better prepare them to provide high quality care for their patients and communities.