Dataset Information

Four-Year-Old's Online Versus Face-to-Face Word Learning via eBooks.

ABSTRACT: Developmental research typically relies on face-to-face testing at laboratories, childcare centers, museums or playgroups. Current social distancing measures have led to a halt in research. Although face-to-face interaction is considered essential for research involving young children, current technology provides viable alternatives. This paper introduces an accessible, replicable and easy to follow method to conduct online developmental research with young children employing a word-learning task as an exemplar, including a detailed workflow and step-by-step guide to using easily accessible programs and platforms. Four-year-old children's (N = 56) performance on a word-learning task delivered online vs. face-to-face is provided as a method validation. Children's performance on the word-learning task was predominantly consistent across delivery modes, with only slight variation in performance between modes. The implications of these similar results across face-to-face and online methods are discussed alongside avenues for further research. Importantly, this paper presents an emerging methodological approach for the online administration of developmental science both within and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic, adding a new tool to current and future developmental scientist's toolkits.

SUBMITTER: Escudero P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7994518 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Four-Year-Old's Online Versus Face-to-Face Word Learning via eBooks.

Escudero Paola P Pino Escobar Gloria G Casey Charlotte G CG Sommer Kristyn K

Frontiers in psychology 20210312

Developmental research typically relies on face-to-face testing at laboratories, childcare centers, museums or playgroups. Current social distancing measures have led to a halt in research. Although face-to-face interaction is considered essential for research involving young children, current technology provides viable alternatives. This paper introduces an accessible, replicable and easy to follow method to conduct online developmental research with young children employing a word-learning tas ...[more]

PMID: 33776837

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOnline video consultation (OVC) is increasingly used in patient-surgeon pre-surgical and follow-up consultation but a comprehensive review assessing its benefits and downsides as compared to face-to-face (F2F) consultation is currently lacking. This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of OVC as compared to F2F consultation.MethodsA literature search (Ovid/Medline, Embase, and Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection) was conducted including studies comparing efficacy, patient and surgeon satisfaction, and information recall between OVC and F2F patient-surgeon consultation (inception-December 4, 2023).ResultsOut of 1021 studies, 14 studies with 13,564 patients met the eligibility criteria, consisting of seven RCTs, three prospective, and four retrospective studies. Various types of surgical consultations were evaluated, including new referrals, routine follow-ups, postoperative follow-ups, and mixed consultations (both pre- and postoperative). None of the randomized trials exclusively compared OVC with F2F consultations in the high-demand preoperative setting, or assessed patient information recall. Efficacy outcomes were reported by seven studies. Among these, three RCTs showed that OVC improved efficacy in terms of waiting time (8.2 vs. 20.7 min, P = 0.01) and total appointment time (24 vs 71 min, P = 0.001, and 21.9 vs. 154.8 min, P = 0.001). Patient satisfaction was reported by 10 studies. Regarding patient satisfaction, one "mixed design" study favoured OVC (92% vs. 63%, P = 0.04), while eight studies reported similar outcomes.ConclusionsThis systematic review identified some benefits of OVC such as shorter waiting and total appointment times as compared to F2F patient-surgeon consultation, although the true value of OVC remains unknown due to the limited available evidence. Future pragmatic RCTs are needed, which should include the pre-surgical consultation and assess patient information recall.

Project description:BackgroundMajor disruptions imposed on medical education by the COVID-19 pandemic and the rapid shift to online teaching in medical programs, necessitated need for evaluation of this format. In this study we directly compared knowledge outcomes, social outcomes, and wellbeing of first year student small group teaching in either face to face (f2f) or online format.MethodsAt the end of the first course of our medical program, students were invited to participate in an online questionnaire with 10 quantitative items and 1 qualitative item. These were analysed using Factor Analysis Pattern Matrix and linear regression to group items and assess relatedness. Qualitative responses were thematized using Qualtrics software (Qualtrics, Provo, UT, USA). Summative assessment results were compared, both between current cohorts to historical cohorts.ResultsFrom a cohort of 298 students there was a 77% response rate. Overall, there were no differences in knowledge gains, either between groups or when compared to historical cohorts. Questionnaire items fell reliably into groups that related to either learning outcomes, social outcomes, or wellbeing. Independent T tests showed that format for teaching (online versus f2f) had an impact on social outcomes but no direct impact on learning outcomes. Linear regression revealed that the social outcomes have a direct impact on wellbeing and almost the double the impact on learning outcomes than mode of learning i.e.. F2f or online (β = .448 and β = .232 respectively).ConclusionIn this study, we were able to show with statistical strength that social outcomes for students such as engaging with peers and facilitator, contributing to the group, and making friends have a direct impact on wellbeing and indirectly impact learning outcomes (such as motivation, satisfaction, integration of knowledge). In a rapidly changing educational landscape, in our opinion, it is vital that these aspects are a focus of design and delivery of medical education. The data from this study supports the notion that activity design and the expertise of the teacher in facilitating the small group activities, has greater impact than the mode of educational delivery itself on students' learning processes.

Project description:IntroductionHealth state valuation studies using composite time trade-off (cTTO) interviews have historically been conducted face-to-face. The COVID-19 pandemic forced disruptive innovation meaning a number of valuation studies conducted interviews via videoconference. These studies found online interviews feasible and acceptable; however, studies were not constructed to test the impact of online versus face-to-face interviews. This study builds on its sister study from the UK and aims to assess the acceptability and equivalence of in person face-to-face interviews with online interviews on cTTO valuation outcomes and on data quality.MethodsParticipants were recruited into a randomised equivalence study via an external research company. Consenting participants were randomly allocated to complete a cTTO interview face-to-face or online, using the same 10 EQ-5D-5L health states. Mean and distribution of the cTTO values, participant understanding, data quality, demographic characteristics, participant preference, participant engagement and participant feedback were all compared across interview mode. Statistical equivalence for cTTO values for each state was tested using two one-sided t-tests by mode. Finally, regression analysis was completed to assess the impacts of interview mode on cTTO value while controlling for demographic characteristics of the participants.ResultsMean cTTO values were shown to be equivalent for mild health states and showed no significant difference for serious health states. The proportion of individuals who expressed an interest in the study but declined to arrange an interview after finding out their randomisation was significantly higher for the face-to-face (21.6%) than the online group (1.8%). No significant difference was found between groups for participant engagement, understanding or feedback nor for any indicators of data quality.ConclusionAdministrating interviews face to face or online did not appear to have a statistically significant impact on mean cTTO values. Offering both online and face-to-face interviews routinely allows all participants to select the most convenient option.

Project description:During the last three decades, thousands of highly qualified social workers who graduated from Romanian universities were employed in the public systems of social work of the European Union. Social group work is studied as a compulsory discipline for undergraduate students. The major focus of our study was the effectiveness of the learning of Social Work Methods with Groups (SWMG) of students, using workshops in a full-time undergraduate program from Romania. We were interested in finding out the perceptions of students about their learning processes and outcomes in the context of teaching the same discipline exclusively in the online medium, due to the pandemic, and in the face-to-face environment via traditional classroom instruction. This study had a mainly quantitative design, covering two academic years between 2018 and 2020 for the two cohorts of social work students. The core analysis was focused on the activities of students at the SWMG laboratories: 50 students in 2020 and 92 students in 2019. Descriptive, inferential statistics and thematic content analysis were applied to two types of deliverables of students: the self-assessment sheet and the group plan. The results of our study showed that training of cognitive and self-awareness skills prevailed among the students who learned online in 2020, while the acquisition of interpersonal skills was reported at a significantly higher level by students who learned in the face-to-face medium in 2019. The students in the traditional classrooms favoured the training of other professional skills, too, like problem-solving skills. However, students who studied exclusively online attributed a significantly greater overall usefulness of SWMG workshops for professional practise than their peers who participated in the face-to-face laboratories. A remarkable result was that more therapeutic and support groups were preferred in the online environment, maybe related to the concerns generated by the pandemic. Remote education forced most students to return to their original places of residence, mostly in the countryside and brought negative psychological effects caused by social isolation due to the pandemic. Remote learning is not the most desirable educational option. Students gain most from blended teaching-learning vehicles: face-to-face and online medium.

Project description:ObjectiveTo obtain evidence whether the online pulmonary rehabilitation(PR) programme 'my-PR' is non-inferior to a conventional face-to-face PR in improving physical performance and symptom scores in patients with COPD.DesignA two-arm parallel single-blind, randomised controlled trial.SettingThe online arm carried out pulmonary rehabilitation in their own homes and the face to face arm in a local rehabilitation facility.Participants90 patients with a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), modified Medical Research Council score of 2 or greater referred for pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), randomised in a 2:1 ratio to online (n=64) or face-to-face PR (n=26). Participants unable to use an internet-enabled device at home were excluded.Main outcome measuresCoprimary outcomes were 6 min walk distance test and the COPD assessment test (CAT) score at completion of the programme.InterventionsA 6-week PR programme organised either as group sessions in a local rehabilitation facility, or online PR via log in and access to 'myPR'.ResultsThe adjusted mean difference for the 6 min walk test (6MWT) between groups for the intention-to-treat (ITT) population was 23.8 m with the lower 95% CI well above the non-inferiority threshold of -40.5 m at -4.5 m with an upper 95% CI of +52.2 m. This result was consistent in the per-protocol (PP) population with a mean adjusted difference of 15 m (-13.7 to 43.8). The CAT score difference in the ITT was -1.0 in favour of the online intervention with the upper 95% CI well below the non-inferiority threshold of 1.8 at 0.86 and the lower 95% CI of -2.9. The PP analysis was consistent with the ITT.ConclusionPR is an evidenced-based and guideline-mandated intervention for patients with COPD with functional limitation. A 6-week programme of online-supported PR was non-inferior to a conventional model delivered in face-to-face sessions in terms of effects on 6MWT distance, and symptom scores and was safe and well tolerated.

Dataset Information

Four-Year-Old's Online Versus Face-to-Face Word Learning via eBooks.

Publications

Four-Year-Old's Online Versus Face-to-Face Word Learning via eBooks.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets