ArticleMedical education online2025
Leveraging learning management systems in medical education: a scoping review of use, outcomes, and improvement pathways.
Article in Medical education online, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Learning Management Systems (LMS) have been increasingly adopted in medical education, serving both undergraduate and postgraduate programs. These platforms are used for various educational purposes, including content delivery, skill development, surgical procedure demonstrations, case-based discussions, and assessments. Despite this, the extent of use and the perceived effectiveness of LMS in medical education remain unclear. Therefore, we planned to conduct a review to explore the usage patterns and the potential benefits of LMS in medical schools. The methodological framework introduced by Arksey and O'Malley was used to conduct this scoping review. Electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and ProQuest were searched for randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials (quasi-experimental studies, pretest-posttest designs) and observational studies that considered the effect of LMS in medical schools. The database search and screening process led to the identification of a limited number of studies that met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently included in the qualitative synthesis. The LMS's used across different medical schools catered to either undergraduate or postgraduate programs. These platforms were employed for a variety of purposes, including content delivery, skill-based teaching, surgical procedure demonstrations, case discussions, and assessments. Student feedback was collected in ten studies, while faculty feedback was reported in only one study. Given that LMS platforms are more likely to benefit students with intrinsic motivation and self-regulated learning behaviors, several studies proposed strategies to enhance LMS utility. These included the use of learning analytics to monitor student engagement and learning patterns, to provide timely feedback and personalised support.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.