We have located links that may give you full text access.
Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Tutor versus computer: a prospective comparison of interactive tutorial and computer-assisted instruction in radiology education.
Academic Radiology 2002 January
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study compared the educational effectiveness of an interactive tutorial with that of interactive computer-assisted instruction (CAI) and determined the effects of personal preference, learning style, and level of training.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four medical students and four radiology residents were prospectively, randomly assigned to receive instruction from different sections of an interactive tutorial and an interactive CAI module. Participants took tests of factual knowledge at the beginning and end of the instruction and a test of visual diagnosis at the end. They completed questionnaires to evaluate their preferred learning styles objectively and to elicit their subjective attitudes toward the two formats. Mean test scores of the tutorial and CAI groups were compared by means of analysis of covariance and two-tailed repeated-measures F test.
RESULTS: Both the tutorial and CAI groups demonstrated significant improvement in posttest scores (P < .01 and P < .01, respectively) with the tutorial group's mean posttest score marginally but significantly higher (32.84 vs 28.13, P < .001). There were no significant interaction effects with participants' year of training (P = .845), objectively evaluated preferred learning style (P = .312), subjectively elicited attitude toward learning with CAI (P = .703), or visual diagnosis score (tutorial, 7.61; CD-ROM, 7.75; P = .79).
CONCLUSION: Interactive tutorial and optimal CAI are both effective instructional formats. The tutorial was marginally but significantly more effective at teaching factual knowledge, an effect unrelated to students' year of training, learning style, or stated enjoyment of CAI. The superiority of the tutorial is expected to increase when it is compared with commercially expedient CAI modules.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-four medical students and four radiology residents were prospectively, randomly assigned to receive instruction from different sections of an interactive tutorial and an interactive CAI module. Participants took tests of factual knowledge at the beginning and end of the instruction and a test of visual diagnosis at the end. They completed questionnaires to evaluate their preferred learning styles objectively and to elicit their subjective attitudes toward the two formats. Mean test scores of the tutorial and CAI groups were compared by means of analysis of covariance and two-tailed repeated-measures F test.
RESULTS: Both the tutorial and CAI groups demonstrated significant improvement in posttest scores (P < .01 and P < .01, respectively) with the tutorial group's mean posttest score marginally but significantly higher (32.84 vs 28.13, P < .001). There were no significant interaction effects with participants' year of training (P = .845), objectively evaluated preferred learning style (P = .312), subjectively elicited attitude toward learning with CAI (P = .703), or visual diagnosis score (tutorial, 7.61; CD-ROM, 7.75; P = .79).
CONCLUSION: Interactive tutorial and optimal CAI are both effective instructional formats. The tutorial was marginally but significantly more effective at teaching factual knowledge, an effect unrelated to students' year of training, learning style, or stated enjoyment of CAI. The superiority of the tutorial is expected to increase when it is compared with commercially expedient CAI modules.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app