RESUMEN
Introduction Single Best Answer questions are an established assessment format in medical education, however, their use as a teaching tool is underexplored in the literature. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and impact of implementing Single Best Answer (SBA) questions into lecture teaching, compared to standard lectures. Methods This evaluation utilised a mixed-method retrospective approach, combining quantitative and qualitative analysis of routine teaching feedback. Over a 2-year period, 10 standard teaching sessions were initially conducted, followed by the development of 43 SBA teaching sessions aimed at improving teaching delivery. Students completed anonymised questionnaires voluntarily after each teaching session (n=3,814 in teaching with SBAs; n=868 in teaching without SBAs). Quantitative data was compared using Welch's t-test. Statistical analysis was completed using the SPSS version 26.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA), with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Results The mean perceived confidence increase in topics before and after teaching was significantly higher with the SBA lecture compared to the standard lecture teaching group (1.32 ± 0.14, 1.07 ± 0.12 respectively; p < 0.001). Engagement levels were significantly higher in the SBA lecture compared to the standard lecture group (4.55 ± 0.12, 4.21 ± 0.15 respectively; p < 0.001). Qualitative data supported these results. Conclusion Single Best Answer question use significantly improved student perceived learning outcomes and engagement, indicating its higher efficacy as a teaching tool in our educational programme. This evaluation highlights the potential use of SBA questions to enhance learning in medical education, further studies and testing methods are required to support its wider generalisability.
RESUMEN
Introduction: Conferences are an important avenue for dissemination of knowledge, research and provide networking opportunities for career development. The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted adoption of virtual platforms for delivery of these conferences. The aim of the study was to determine the utility and educational impact of a student-led virtual webinar to deliver an undergraduate cardiovascular conference compared to a traditional in-person conference. Methods: We conducted a two-day virtual conference using the Zoom platform in June 2021. The conference consisted of cardiology subspecialty lectures, and workshops were conducted by a junior doctor, senior cardiology trainees and consultants. The conference also outlaid a virtual poster hall and oral presentation session while networking opportunities were encouraged using breakout rooms and poster hall chat function. A 38-item self-administered online questionnaire was designed and disseminated at the end of the conference to all attending delegates. All data analysis and data visualisation strategies were conducted on R statistical programming. Results: Eight-hundred and forty students from 55 countries attended the event. Four hundred and ninety participants (58.5% response rate, 55.9% female) completed the questionnaire. Factors such as weekend conference (84.9%), student-led or organised (84.1%), environmental/sustainable (82.3%), appropriate level for me (81.5%) and comfort to present (80.8%) were deemed to be at least equal to traditional in-person conference. The conference also increased participants' interest, their core cardiology knowledge and improved their critical analysis and basic echocardiography skills [median 4 (IQR 3-5) for all parameters]. Overall, participants also found it easy to use the virtual platform [median 5 (IQR 5-5)] and easier to ask questions compared to in-person conferences [median 5 (IQR 4-5) vs median 4 (IQR 3-5), p < 0.001]. Conclusion: Our virtual conference provided opportunities to students that the COVID-19 pandemic would have otherwise affected; however, its utility and educational impact will need to be assessed within its individual context of delivery.