Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of E-Learning in Healthcare: A Fuzzy ANP Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. E-Learning Systems and Technology
2.2. E-Learning and Healthcare
3. Methodology
3.1. Rationale
3.2. Methodology
3.3. Prioritizing Main Components and Sub-Components Using Fuzzy ANP
3.4. Fuzzy Weight Calculation for Effective E-Learning Factors
3.5. Measurement Model Evaluation
4. Results and Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Ajenifuja, D.; Adeliyi, T. Evaluating the Influence of E-Learning on the Performance of Healthcare Professionals in Providing Support. Int. J. E-Learn. 2022, 21, 201–215. [Google Scholar]
- Koch, U.; Stout, S.; Landon, B.E.; Phillips, R.S. From Healthcare to Health: A Proposed Pathway to Population Health. Healthcare 2016, 4, 291–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tamim Kashifi, M.; Jamal, A.; Samim Kashefi, M.; Almoshaogeh, M.; Masiur Rahman, S. Predicting the Travel Mode Choice with Interpretable Machine Learning Techniques: A Comparative Study. Travel Behav. Soc. 2022, 29, 279–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Golden, R.E.; Klap, R.; Carney, D.V.; Yano, E.M.; Hamilton, A.B.; Taylor, S.L.; Kligler, B.; Whitehead, A.M.; Saechao, F.; Zaiko, Y.; et al. Promoting Learning Health System Feedback Loops: Experience with a VA Practice-Based Research Network Card Study. Healthcare 2021, 8, 100484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, S.; Eum, K.; Kang, H.S.; Karsten, K. Factors Influencing Academic Self-Efficacy among Nursing Students during COVID-19: A Path Analysis. J. Transcult. Nurs. 2022, 33, 239–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harrison, M.I.; Borsky, A.E. How Alignment between Health Systems and Their Embedded Research Units Contributes to System Learning. Healthcare 2023, 11, 100688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Konstantinidis, K.; Apostolakis, I.; Karaiskos, P. A Narrative Review of E-Learning in Professional Education of Healthcare Professionals in Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy. Radiography 2022, 28, 565–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sandars, J. Cost-Effective e-Learning in Medical Education. In Cost Effectiveness in Medical Education; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; pp. 40–47. ISBN 0429091281. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Z.-Y.; Zhang, L.-J.; Liu, Y.-H.; Jiang, W.-X.; Jia, J.-Y.; Tang, S.-L.; Liu, X.-Y. The Effectiveness of E-Learning in Continuing Medical Education for Tuberculosis Health Workers: A Quasi-Experiment from China. Infect. Dis. Poverty 2021, 10, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asch, D.A.; Joffe, S.; Bierer, B.E.; Greene, S.M.; Lieu, T.A.; Platt, J.E.; Whicher, D.; Ahmed, M.; Platt, R. Rethinking Ethical Oversight in the Era of the Learning Health System. Healthcare 2020, 8, 100462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, H.; Shiang, S.-R.; Yeh, C.; Chen, Y.-N.; Huang, Y.; Kong, S.-Y.; Lee, L. Spoken Knowledge Organization by Semantic Structuring and a Prototype Course Lecture System for Personalized Learning. IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process. 2014, 22, 883–898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahalan, N.; Hassan, H.; Atan, H. Student Engagement in Online Learning: Learners Attitude toward e-Mentoring. Proced. Social Behav. Sci. 2012, 67, 464–475. [Google Scholar]
- Lai, C.-Y.; Wu, C.-C. Supporting Nursing Students’ Critical Thinking with a Mobile Web Learning Environment. Nurse Educ. 2012, 37, 235–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ortega, L.D.M.; Plata, R.B.; Rodríguez, M.L.J.; González, J.R.H.; Herráiz, J.J.M.; De Mesa, J.A.G.; Gutiérrez, J.M.; Tortosa, S.O. Using M-Learning on Nursing Courses to Improve Learning. CIN Comput. Informat. Nurs. 2011, 29, TC98–TC104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bloomfield, J.G.; Jones, A. Using E-Learning to Support Clinical Skills Acquisition: Exploring the Experiences and Perceptions of Graduate First-Year Pre-Registration Nursing Students—A Mixed Method Study. Nurse Educ. Today 2013, 33, 1605–1611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evans, A.M.; Ellis, G.; Norman, S.; Luke, K. Patient Safety Education—A Description and Evaluation of an International, Interdisciplinary e-Learning Programme. Nurse Educ. Today 2014, 34, 248–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Arving, C.; Wadensten, B.; Johansson, B. Registered Nurses’ Thoughts on Blended Learning in a Postgraduate Course in Cancer Care—Content Analyses of Web Surveys and a Focus Group Interview. J. Cancer Educ. 2014, 29, 278–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCutcheon, K.; Lohan, M.; Traynor, M.; Martin, D. A Systematic Review Evaluating the Impact of Online or Blended Learning vs. Face-to-face Learning of Clinical Skills in Undergraduate Nurse Education. J. Adv. Nurs. 2015, 71, 255–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alemán, J.L.F.; de Gea, J.M.C.; Mondéjar, J.J.R. Effects of Competitive Computer-Assisted Learning versus Conventional Teaching Methods on the Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge in Medical Surgical Nursing Students. Nurse Educ. Today 2011, 31, 866–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dharmawansa, A.D.; Nakahira, K.T.; Fukumura, Y. Detecting Eye Blinking of a Real-World Student and Introducing to the Virtual e-Learning Environment. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2013, 22, 717–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jafari Navimipour, N.; Masoud Rahmani, A.; Habibizad Navin, A.; Hosseinzadeh, M. Job Scheduling in the Expert Cloud Based on Genetic Algorithms. Kybernetes 2014, 43, 1262–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loureiro, A.; Bettencourt, T. The Use of Virtual Environments as an Extended Classroom–a Case Study with Adult Learners in Tertiary Education. Procedia Technol. 2014, 13, 97–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gagnon, M.-P.; Payne-Gagnon, J.; Fortin, J.-P.; Paré, G.; Côté, J.; Courcy, F. A Learning Organization in the Service of Knowledge Management among Nurses: A Case Study. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 2015, 35, 636–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Si, J. Critical E-Learning Quality Factors Affecting Student Satisfaction in a Korean Medical School. Korean J. Med. Educ. 2022, 34, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Berestova, A.; Burdina, G.; Lobuteva, L.; Lobuteva, A. Academic Motivation of University Students and the Factors that Influence It in an E-Learning Environment. Electron. J. e-Learn. 2022, 20, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dominici, G.; Palumbo, F. How to Build an E-Learning Product: Factors for Student/Customer Satisfaction. Bus. Horiz. 2013, 56, 87–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Penjor, S.; Zander, P.-O. Predicting Virtual Learning Environment Adoption-A Case Study. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1503.02408. [Google Scholar]
- Zareie, B.; Navimipour, N.J. The Impact of Electronic Environmental Knowledge on the Environmental Behaviors of People. Comput. Human Behav. 2016, 59, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navimipour, N.J.; Zareie, B. A Model for Assessing the Impact of E-Learning Systems on Employees’ Satisfaction. Comput. Human Behav. 2015, 53, 475–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Navimipour, N.J.; Navin, A.H.; Rahmani, A.M.; Hosseinzadeh, M. Behavioral Modeling and Automated Verification of a Cloud-Based Framework to Share the Knowledge and Skills of Human Resources. Comput. Ind. 2015, 68, 65–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Özyurt, Ö.; Özyurt, H. Learning Style Based Individualized Adaptive E-Learning Environments: Content Analysis of the Articles Published from 2005 to 2014. Comput. Human Behav. 2015, 52, 349–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, A.K.M.N. E-Learning System Use and Its Outcomes: Moderating Role of Perceived Compatibility. Telemat. Inform. 2016, 33, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lara, J.A.; Lizcano, D.; Martínez, M.A.; Pazos, J.; Riera, T. A System for Knowledge Discovery in E-Learning Environments within the European Higher Education Area–Application to Student Data from Open University of Madrid, UDIMA. Comput. Educ. 2014, 72, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Blanco, Á.; Marchiori, E.J.; Torrente, J.; Martínez-Ortiz, I.; Fernández-Manjón, B. Using E-Learning Standards in Educational Video Games. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 2013, 36, 178–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- González-Marcos, A.; Alba-Elías, F.; Navaridas-Nalda, F.; Ordieres-Meré, J. Student Evaluation of a Virtual Experience for Project Management Learning: An Empirical Study for Learning Improvement. Comput. Educ. 2016, 102, 172–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stöhr, C.; Demazière, C.; Adawi, T. Comparing Student Activity and Performance in the Classroom and a Virtual Learning Environment. In Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Learning, Prague, Czech Republic, 27–28 October 2016; Academic Conferences International Limited: Reading, UK, 2016; p. 664. [Google Scholar]
- Tirziu, A.-M.; Vrabie, C. Education 2.0: E-Learning Methods. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 186, 376–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, E.Y.; Lin, S.W.; Huang, T.K. What Type of Learning Style Leads to Online Participation in the Mixed-Mode e-Learning Environment? A Study of Software Usage Instruction. Comput. Educ. 2012, 58, 338–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schunk, D.H.; Meece, J.R.; Pintrich, P.R. Motivation in Education: Theory, Research, and Applications; Pearson Higher Education: New York, NY, USA, 2012; ISBN 013309264X. [Google Scholar]
- Rodrigue, S.; Soule, L.; Fanguy, R.; Kleen, B. University Student Experiences and Expectations In Regard To Technology. J. High. Educ. Theory Pract. 2016, 16, 59–70. [Google Scholar]
- Büyüközkan, G.; Çifçi, G. A Novel Hybrid MCDM Approach Based on Fuzzy DEMATEL, Fuzzy ANP and Fuzzy TOPSIS to Evaluate Green Suppliers. Expert Syst. Appl. 2012, 39, 3000–3011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uygun, Ö.; Kaçamak, H.; Kahraman, Ü.A. An Integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy ANP Techniques for Evaluation and Selection of Outsourcing Provider for a Telecommunication Company. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2015, 86, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McPherson, M.A.; Nunes, J.M. Critical Issues for E-learning Delivery: What May Seem Obvious Is Not Always Put into Practice. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2008, 24, 433–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnard, A.; Nash, R.; O’Brien, M. Information Literacy: Developing Lifelong Skills through Nursing Education. J. Nurs. Educ. 2005, 44, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Childs, S.; Blenkinsopp, E.; Hall, A.; Walton, G. Effective E-learning for Health Professionals and Students—Barriers and Their Solutions. A Systematic Review of the Literature—Findings from the HeXL Project. Health Inf. Libr. J. 2005, 22, 20–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wellard, S.; Bethune, E. Learning Issues for Nurses in Renal Satellite Centres. Aust. J. Rural Health 2000, 8, 322–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sinclair, P.M.; Levett-Jones, T. The Evolution of the Nephrology Educators’ Network. J. Ren. Care 2011, 37, 40–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maloney, S.; Chamberlain, M.; Morrison, S.; Kotsanas, G.; Keating, J.L.; Ilic, D. Health Professional Learner Attitudes and Use of Digital Learning Resources. J. Med. Internet Res. 2013, 15, e2094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sinclair, P.M.; Bowen, L.; Donkin, B. Professional Nephrology Nursing Portfolios: Maintaining Competence to Practise. Ren. Soc. Australas. J. 2013, 9, 35–40. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, R.D.C. Leadership in Healthcare. Anaesth. Intensive Care Med. 2013, 14, 39–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thimbleby, H. Technology and the Future of Healthcare. J. Public health Res. 2013, 2, jphr-2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lenthall, S.; Wakerman, J.; Opie, T.; Dunn, S.; MacLeod, M.; Dollard, M.; Rickard, G.; Knight, S. Nursing Workforce in Very Remote Australia, Characteristics and Key Issues. Aust. J. Rural Health 2011, 19, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bennett, P.N.; Jaeschke, S.; Sinclair, P.M.; Kerr, P.G.; Holt, S.; Schoch, M.; Fortnum, D.; Ockerby, C.; Kent, B. Increasing Home Dialysis Knowledge through a Web-based E-learning Program. Nephrology 2014, 19, 345–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doorenbos, A.Z.; Kundu, A.; Eaton, L.H.; Demiris, G.; Haozous, E.A.; Towle, C.; Buchwald, D. Enhancing Access to Cancer Education for Rural Healthcare Providers via Telehealth. J. Cancer Educ. 2011, 26, 682–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Esteva, A.; Robicquet, A.; Ramsundar, B.; Kuleshov, V.; DePristo, M.; Chou, K.; Cui, C.; Corrado, G.; Thrun, S.; Dean, J. A Guide to Deep Learning in Healthcare. Nat. Med. 2019, 25, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miotto, R.; Wang, F.; Wang, S.; Jiang, X.; Dudley, J.T. Deep Learning for Healthcare: Review, Opportunities and Challenges. Brief. Bioinform. 2018, 19, 1236–1246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Arnrich, B.; Mayora, O.; Bardram, J.; Tröster, G. Pervasive Healthcare. Methods Inf. Med. 2010, 49, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hebda, T.; Calderone, T.L. What Nurse Educators Need to Know about the TIGER Initiative. Nurse Educ. 2010, 35, 56–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Linguistic Variables | Fuzzy Number | Triangular Fuzzy Number |
---|---|---|
Equally Important (EI) | 1 | (1, 1, 1) |
Weakly More Important (WI) | 3 | (2/3, 1, 3/2) |
Strongly More Important (SI) | 5 | (3/2, 2, 5/2) |
Very Strongly More Important (VI) | 7 | (5/2, 3, 7/2) |
Absolutely Important (AI) | 9 | (7/2, 4, 9/2) |
Components | Sub-Components | Symbol |
---|---|---|
Success | Experts’ Feedback | C1 |
User Adaption | C2 | |
Reliability of Materials | C3 | |
Readability | Structure of Course | C4 |
Methodology | C5 | |
Format | C6 | |
Effectiveness | Planning and Training Objectives | C7 |
Practice-based Learning | C8 | |
Materials’ Flexibility | C9 | |
Engagement | Enjoyment and Playfulness | C10 |
Learning Management | C11 | |
Remote Exchanges and Collaboration | C12 | |
Availability | Online Learning | C13 |
Web-based Learning | C14 | |
Accessibility | C15 | |
Offline Learning | C16 | |
Satisfaction | Ease of Use | C17 |
Reliability of Software | C18 | |
Overall Learner Satisfaction | C19 |
Success | Readability | Effectiveness | Engagement | Availability | Satisfaction | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Success | 0.037864 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 |
Readability | 0.019311 | 0.037864 | 0.019311 | 0.037864 | 0.013253 | 0.015903 |
Effectiveness | 0.037864 | 0.018932 | 0.037864 | 0.018932 | 0.018554 | 0.018554 |
Engagement | 0.019311 | 0.012117 | 0.018932 | 0.037864 | 0.016282 | 0.017039 |
Availability | 0.01969 | 0.037864 | 0.019311 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 | 0.01401 |
Satisfaction | 0.01969 | 0.037864 | 0.019311 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 | 0.037864 |
Main Components | Item | Factor Loading | CR |
---|---|---|---|
Success | C1 | 0.697 | 0.083 |
C2 | 0.618 | ||
C3 | 0.808 | ||
Readability | C4 | 0.776 | 0.003 |
C5 | 0.833 | ||
C6 | 0.636 | ||
Effectiveness | C7 | 0.612 | 0.010 |
C8 | 0.769 | ||
C9 | 0.637 | ||
Engagement | C10 | 0.755 | 0.034 |
C11 | 0.792 | ||
C12 | 0.685 | ||
Availability | C13 | 0.822 | 0.020 |
C14 | 0.791 | ||
C15 | 0.650 | ||
C16 | 0.639 | ||
Satisfaction | C17 | 0.801 | 0.087 |
C18 | 0.717 | ||
C19 | 0.713 |
(Main Components) | (Sub-Components) | Defuzzied Weight | Rank | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | 0.33 | 0.24 | 2 | 1 | |
C2 | 0.26 | 3 | |||
C3 | 0.41 | 1 | |||
C4 | 0.41 | 0.14 | 1 | 5 | |
C5 | 0.33 | 2 | |||
C6 | 0.26 | 3 | |||
C7 | 0.28 | 0.15 | 1 | 4 | |
C8 | 0.23 | 2 | |||
C9 | 0.18 | 3 | |||
C10 | 0.25 | 0.12 | 3 | 6 | |
C11 | 0.41 | 1 | |||
C12 | 0.34 | 2 | |||
C13 | 0.28 | 0.16 | 2 | 3 | |
C14 | 0.23 | 3 | |||
C15 | 0.32 | 1 | |||
C16 | 0.17 | 4 | |||
C17 | 0.33 | 0.19 | 2 | 2 | |
C18 | 0.26 | 3 | |||
C19 | 0.41 | 1 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mahdavi Ardestani, S.F.; Adibi, S.; Golshan, A.; Sadeghian, P. Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of E-Learning in Healthcare: A Fuzzy ANP Study. Healthcare 2023, 11, 2035. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142035
Mahdavi Ardestani SF, Adibi S, Golshan A, Sadeghian P. Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of E-Learning in Healthcare: A Fuzzy ANP Study. Healthcare. 2023; 11(14):2035. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142035
Chicago/Turabian StyleMahdavi Ardestani, Seyed Faraz, Sasan Adibi, Arman Golshan, and Paria Sadeghian. 2023. "Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of E-Learning in Healthcare: A Fuzzy ANP Study" Healthcare 11, no. 14: 2035. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142035
APA StyleMahdavi Ardestani, S. F., Adibi, S., Golshan, A., & Sadeghian, P. (2023). Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of E-Learning in Healthcare: A Fuzzy ANP Study. Healthcare, 11(14), 2035. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11142035