A New Normal: Assessment Outcomes and Recommendations for Virtual Versus In-Person Curricula in Post-COVID-19 Times.

Introduction: COVID-19 response efforts that began in March 2020 prompted an urgent need to transition medical education from an in-person to a virtual format. Our aim is to provide evaluation of a virtual platform for a fully integrated curriculum to provide future guidance in teaching methods. Materials and Methods: We used summative assessments and course evaluations from pre- and post-transition from in-person to virtual delivery of educational content to measure the impacts of this transition on student performance and perceptions. Additionally, we surveyed students about their in-person versus online educational preferences. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in student knowledge acquisition as assessed by weighted averages of summative assessments when comparing an in-person to a virtual educational platform. While the transition to virtual learning was initially well-received by students, our studied cohorts gave lower scores for the overall learning experience after prolonged virtual learning (p < 0.001). Students had a strong preference that anatomy and other group sessions should be delivered in-person. There was no strong preference whether other learning modalities should be given in-person or virtually. Conclusions: Although student knowledge acquisition remained stable on a virtual platform, the student learning experience varied. We recommend that when returning to a new normal after COVID-19 restrictions are lifted, sessions that require 3-dimensional or group learning should remain in-person, while other educational activities may be offered on a virtual platform and that, whenever virtual learning is employed, attention be paid to ensuring ongoing social and academic engagement between learners and faculty.

Telehealth in Genetics: The Genetic Counselor Perspective on the Utility of Telehealth in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic in Wisconsin.

BACKGROUND: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many genetics clinics across the country were prompted to integrate telephone visits and videoconferencing into their practice to promote the safety of patients and clinic staff members. Our study examined providers' perspectives on the utility and effectiveness of these telehealth-based clinic visits in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in Wisconsin. METHODS: An anonymous Qualtrics survey was distributed via email in October 2020 to all members of the Wisconsin Genetic Systems Integration Hub and the Wisconsin Genetic Counselor Association. Current clinical genetic providers were eligible to participate in the survey. The survey assessed providers' experiences and perceptions toward utilizing telehealth in delivering clinical genetic services to their patients during the pandemic. RESULTS: Forty-seven currently practicing clinical genetic counselors in Wisconsin either partially or fully completed the survey. Nearly all respondents somewhat (23%) or strongly (75%) wanted to incorporate telehealth in the future, primarily because of perceived improvements in clinic functioning. Patients with suboptimal telecommunications capacities were considered the most challenging aspect of telehealth, and better technology support was the most frequently cited strategy for addressing current telehealth limitations. CONCLUSION: Clinical genetic counselors in Wisconsin generally reported positive experiences integrating telehealth into their patient care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many counselors see telehealth as a way to increase access to genetic services and, with better technology support from their intuitions, would support utilizing telehealth in their clinical practice.

A New Normal: Assessment Outcomes and Recommendations for Virtual Versus In-Person Curricula in Post-COVID-19 Times

Introduction COVID-19 response efforts that began in March 2020 prompted an urgent need to transition medical education from an in-person to a virtual format. Our aim is to provide evaluation of a virtual platform for a fully integrated curriculum to provide future guidance in teaching methods. Materials and Methods We used summative assessments and course evaluations from pre- and post-transition from in-person to virtual delivery of educational content to measure the impacts of this transition on student performance and perceptions. Additionally, we surveyed students about their in-person versus online educational preferences. Results There were no statistically significant differences in student knowledge acquisition as assessed by weighted averages of summative assessments when comparing an in-person to a virtual educational platform. While the transition to virtual learning was initially well-received by students, our studied cohorts gave lower scores for the overall learning experience after prolonged virtual learning (p < 0.001). Students had a strong preference that anatomy and other group sessions should be delivered in-person. There was no strong preference whether other learning modalities should be given in-person or virtually. Conclusions Although student knowledge acquisition remained stable on a virtual platform, the student learning experience varied. We recommend that when returning to a new normal after COVID-19 restrictions are lifted, sessions that require 3-dimensional or group learning should remain in-person, while other educational activities may be offered on a virtual platform and that, whenever virtual learning is employed, attention be paid to ensuring ongoing social and academic engagement between learners and faculty.

Dose of aspirin to prevent preterm preeclampsia in women with moderate or high-risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of aspirin dose on the incidence of all gestational age preeclampsia and preterm preeclampsia. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases (Cochrane, PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Web of Science) were searched for articles published between January 1985 and March 2019 with no language restrictions. METHODS: We followed the PRIMSA guidelines and utilized Covidence software. Articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers, with discrepancies settled by an independent 3rd party. Study selection criteria were randomized trials comparing aspirin for prevention of all gestational age and preterm preeclampsia to placebo or no antiplatelet treatment in women aged 15-55 years with moderate or high-risk factors according to the list of risk factors from American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and United States Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. The quality of trials was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The data were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis comparing aspirin at doses of <81, 81, 100, and 150 mg. Pre-specified outcomes were all gestational age and preterm preeclampsia. RESULTS: Of 1,609 articles screened, 23 randomized trials, which included 32,370 women, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. In preterm preeclampsia, women assigned at random to 150 mg experienced a significant 62% reduction in risk of preterm preeclampsia (RR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.20-0.72; P = 0.011). Aspirin doses <150 mg produced no significant reductions. The number needed to treat with 150 mg of aspirin was 39 (95% CI: 23-100). There was a maximum 30% reduction in risk of all gestational age preeclampsia at all aspirin doses. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, based on indirect comparisons, aspirin at a dose greater than the current, recommended 81 mg was associated with the highest reduction in preterm preeclampsia. Our meta-analysis is limited due to the deficiency of homogeneous high evidence data available in the literature to date; however, it may be prudent for clinicians to consider that the optimal aspirin dose may be higher than the current guidelines advise. Future research to compare the efficacy aspirin doses greater than 81 mg is recommended. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42019127951 (University of York, UK; http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/).