↓ Skip to main content

Distance learning ects and flipped classroom in the anatomy learning: comparative study of the use of augmented reality, video and notes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
179 Mendeley
Title
Distance learning ects and flipped classroom in the anatomy learning: comparative study of the use of augmented reality, video and notes
Published in
BMC Medical Education, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0757-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Javier Ferrer-Torregrosa, Miguel Ángel Jiménez-Rodríguez, Javier Torralba-Estelles, Fernanda Garzón-Farinós, Marcelo Pérez-Bermejo, Nadia Fernández-Ehrling

Abstract

The establishment of the ECTS (European Credit Transfer System) is one of the pillars of the European Space of Higher Education. This way of accounting for the time spent in training has two essential parts, classroom teaching (work with the professor) and distance learning (work without the professor, whether in an individual or collective way). Much has been published on the distance learning part, but less on the classroom teaching section. In this work, the authors investigate didactic strategies and associated aids for distance learning work in a concept based on flipped classroom where transmitting information is carried out with aids that the professor prepares, so that the student works in an independent way before the classes, thus being able to dedicate the classroom teaching time to more complex learning and being able to count on the professor's help. Three teaching aids applied to the study of anatomy have been compared: Notes with images, videos, and augmented reality. Four dimensions have been compared: the time spent, the acquired learnings, the metacognitive perception, and the prospects of the use of augmented reality for study. The results show the effectiveness, in all aspects, of augmented reality when compared with the rest of aids. The questionnaire assessed the acquired knowledge through a course exam, where 5.60 points were obtained for the notes group, 6.54 for the video group, and 7.19 for the augmented reality group. That is 0.94 more points for the video group compared with the notes and 1.59 more points for the augmented reality group compared with the notes group. This research demonstrates that, although technology has not been sufficiently developed for education, it is expected that it can be improved in both the autonomous work of the student and the academic training of health science students and that we can teach how to learn. Moreover, one can see how the grades of the students who studied with augmented reality are more grouped and that there is less dispersion in the marks compared with other materials.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 179 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 176 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 17%
Unspecified 23 13%
Researcher 20 11%
Student > Bachelor 20 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 10%
Other 67 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 22%
Unspecified 34 19%
Social Sciences 28 16%
Computer Science 17 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Other 46 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 May 2017.
All research outputs
#5,514,351
of 9,770,649 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,048
of 1,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,188
of 263,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#28
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,770,649 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,462 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,303 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.