Conventional vs. e-learning in nursing education: A systematic review and meta-analysis

By and large, in health professions training, the direction of the effect of e-learning, positive or negative, strongly depends on the learning outcome in question as well as on learning methods which e-learning is compared to. In nursing education, meta-analytically generated knowledge regarding the comparisons between conventional and e-learning is scarce.

The aim of this review is to discover the size of the effect of e-learning on learning outcomes in nursing education and to assess the quality of studies in which e-learning has been compared to conventional learning.

A systematic search of six electronic databases, PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, and ERIC, was conducted in order to identify relevant peer-reviewed English language articles published between 2011 and 2015. The quality of the studies included as well as the risk of bias in each study was assessed. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to generate a pooled mean difference in the learning outcome.

Altogether, 10 studies were eligible for the quality assessment and meta-analysis. Nine studies were evaluated as good quality studies, but not without a risk of bias. Performance bias caused a high risk in nearly all the studies. In the meta-analysis, an e-learning method resulted in test scores that were, on average, five points higher than a conventional method on a 0-100 scale. Heterogeneity between the studies was very large.

The size and direction of the effect of a learning method on learning outcomes appeared to be strongly situational. We suggest that meta-regressions should be performed instead of basic meta-analyses in order to reveal factors that cause variation in the learning outcomes of nursing education. It might be necessary to perform separate meta-analyses between e-learning interventions aimed at improving nursing knowledge and those aimed at improving nursing skills.