Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Perception of Technology-Enhanced Learning by Medical Students: an Integrative Review

  • Review
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This review aims to explore the perception of technology-enhanced learning by medical students. From the initial 2947 records found, 38 studies from journals indexed in the Web of Science database were included after screening. Several main topics were isolated, based on a thematic analysis: student’s attitude towards e-learning and modern technologies in medical education; social networks, video, and mobile devices as information source and communication tool; and barriers to the use of technologies in medical education. The results have shown that a positive attitude towards technologies in medical education and learning is prevalent among students. The popularity of blended learning was confirmed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of Data and Materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study is included in this published article except for the complete database search string, which is available on request.

Abbreviations

2D:

two-dimensional space

3D:

three-dimensional space

CASP:

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme

CPR:

cardiopulmonary resuscitation

EHR:

electronic health records

ICT:

information and communication technology

IT:

information technology

LMS:

learning management system

mHealth:

Mobile Health

M-learning:

mobile learning

MMAT:

Mixed Method Appraisal Tool

TEL:

technology-enhanced learning

VR:

virtual reality

WoS:

Web of Science

References

  1. Komisja Europejska, Education A and CEA, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. The European Higher Education Area in 2018: Bologna Process Implementation Report [Internet]. Brussels; Lusembourg: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency: Publications Office of the European Union. 2018. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/sites/eurydice/files/bologna_internet_0.pdf. Accessed 14 Aug 2019.

  2. Kirkwood A, Price L. Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is “enhanced” and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learn Media Technol. 2014;39:6–36.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Guze PA. Using technology to meet the challenges of medical education. Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc. 2015;126:260–70.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Geisinger KF. 21st century skills: what are they and how do we assess them? Appl Meas Educ. 2016;29:245–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Clunie L, Morris NP, Joynes VCT, Pickering JD. How comprehensive are research studies investigating the efficacy of technology-enhanced learning resources in anatomy education? A systematic review. Anat Sci Educ. 2018;11:303–19.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Trelease RB. From chalkboard, slides, and paper to e-learning: how computing technologies have transformed anatomical sciences education. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9:583–602.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt H, et al. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111:8410–5.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Pereira JA, Pleguezuelos E, Merí A, Molina-Ros A, Molina-Tomás MC, Masdeu C. Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Med Educ. 2007;41:189–95.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen F, Lui AM, Martinelli SM. A systematic review of the effectiveness of flipped classrooms in medical education. Med Educ. 2017;51:585–97.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sharma N, Doherty I, Dong C. Adaptive learning in medical education: the final piece of technology enhanced learning? Ulster Med J. 2017;86:198–200.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ozdalga E, Ozdalga A, Ahuja N. The smartphone in medicine: a review of current and potential use among physicians and students. J Med Internet Res. 2012;14:e128.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Matzke J, Ziegler C, Martin K, Crawford S, Sutton E. Usefulness of virtual reality in assessment of medical student laparoscopic skill. J Surg Res. 2017;211:191–5.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Romanov K, Nevgi A. Do medical students watch video clips in eLearning and do these facilitate learning? Med Teach. 2007;29:490–4.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cismariu, Ciurel DL, Hosu I. Generation Z and social media. In: Vlada M, Albeanu G, Istrate O, Adascalitei A, editors. Proc 14th Int Conf Virtual Learn Icvl 2019. Bucharest: Bucharest University Press; 2019. p. 367–73.

  15. Friedman CP, Donaldson KM, Vantsevich AV. Educating medical students in the era of ubiquitous information. Med Teach. 2016;38:504–9.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Selwyn N. Digital downsides: exploring university students’ negative engagements with digital technology. Teach High Educ. 2016;21:1006–21.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kirschner PA, De Bruyckere P. The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teach Teach Educ. 2017;67:135–42.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Gallardo-Echenique EE, Marqués-Molías L, Bullen M, Strijbos J-W. Let’s talk about digital learners in the digital era. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn. 2015;16.

  19. Bullen M, Morgan T. Digital learners not digital natives. Cuestión Univ 2016;0:60–8.

  20. Han E-R, Yeo S, Kim M-J, Lee Y-H, Park K-H, Roh H. Medical education trends for future physicians in the era of advanced technology and artificial intelligence: an integrative review. BMC Med Educ. 2019;19:460.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Huang R, Spector JM, Yang J. Educational technology: a primer for the 21st century. Singapore: Springer; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Biggs J. What do inventories of students learning-processes really measure - a theoretical review and clarification. Br J Educ Psychol. 1993;63:3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Trigwell K, Prosser M. Towards an understanding of individual acts of teaching and learning. High Educ Res Dev. 1997;16:241–52.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Prosser M, Trigwell K. Understanding learning and teaching: the experience in higher education. Buckingham; Philadelphia: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ellis RA, Goodyear P. Students’ experiences of e-learning in higher education: the ecology of sustainable innovation. New York: Routledge; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Coertjens L, Vanthournout G, Lindblom-Ylanne S, Postareff L. Understanding individual differences in approaches to learning across courses: a mixed method approach. Learn Individ Differ. 2016;51:69–80.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Price L. Modelling factors for predicting student learning outcomes in higher education. In: Gijbels D, Donche V, Richardson JTE, Vermunt JD, editors. Learn Patterns High Educ Dimens Res Perspect. Abingdon: Routledge; 2013. p. 56–77. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315885438.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. Peart DJ, Rumbold PLS, Keane KM, Allin L. Student use and perception of technology enhanced learning in a mass lecture knowledge-rich domain first year undergraduate module. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2017;14:40.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005;52:546–53.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Toronto CE, Remington R, editors. A step-by-step guide to conducting an integrative review. Cham: Springer; 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  31. CASP - Critical Appraisal Skills Programme [Internet]. 2018. https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018.pdf. Accessed 9 Jun 2019.

  32. Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, et al. Mixed Method Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 [Internet]. 2018. https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018.pdf. Accessed 9 Jun 2019.

  33. Andrew C, Traynor V, Iverson D. An integrative review: understanding driving retirement decisions for individuals living with a dementia. J Adv Nurs. 2015;71:2728–40.

    Google Scholar 

  34. O’Doherty D, Dromey M, Lougheed J, Hannigan A, Last J, McGrath D. Barriers and solutions to online learning in medical education - an integrative review. BMC Med Educ. 2018;18:130.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Barry DS, Marzouk F, Chulak-Oglu K, Bennett D, Tierney P, O’Keeffe GW. Anatomy education for the YouTube generation. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9:90–6.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sezer B. Faculty of medicine students’ attitudes towards electronic learning and their opinion for an example of distance learning application. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;55:932–9.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Stankovic A, Petrovic B, Milosevic Z. Attitudes and knowledge of medical students about distance learning. Acta Fac Medicae Naissensis. 2015;32:199–207.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Brockman RM, Taylor JM, Segars LW, Selke V, Taylor TAH. Student perceptions of online and in-person microbiology laboratory experiences in undergraduate medical education. Med Educ Online. 2020;25:1710324.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ekenze SO, Okafor CI, Ekenze OS, Nwosu JN, Ezepue UF. The value of internet tools in undergraduate surgical education: perspective of medical students in a developing country. World J Surg. 2017;41:672–80.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Scott K, Morris A, Marais B. Medical student use of digital learning resources. Clin Teach. 2018;15:29–33.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chen J, Zhou J, Wang Y, Qi G, Xia C, Mo G, et al. Blended learning in basic medical laboratory courses improves medical students’ abilities in self-learning, understanding, and problem solving. Adv Physiol Educ. 2020;44:9–14.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Milic NM, Ilic N, Stanisavljevic DM, Cirkovic AM, Milin JS, Bukumiric ZM, et al. Bridging the gap between informatics and medicine upon medical school entry: implementing a course on the applicative use of ICT. Assefa Woreta S, editor. PLOS ONE. 2018;13:e0194194.

  43. Hyll M, Schvarcz R, Manninen K. Exploring how medical students learn with the help of a digital presentation: a qualitative study. Bmc Med Educ. 2019;19:210.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Al-Hussaini A, Tomkinson A. Exploring medical undergraduates’ perceptions of the educational value of a novel ENT iBook: a qualitative study. J Vis Commun Med. 2016;39:3–9.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Law JK, Thome PA, Lindeman B, Jackson DC, Lidor AO. Student use and perceptions of mobile technology in clinical clerkships - guidance for curriculum design. Am J Surg. 2018;215:196–9.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Cheng DR, Scodellaro T, Uahwatanasakul W, South M. An electronic medical record in pediatric medical education: survey of medical students’ expectations and experiences. Appl Clin Inform. 2018;9:809–16.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Liebert CA, Mazer L, Bereknyei Merrell S, Lin DT, Lau JN. Student perceptions of a simulation-based flipped classroom for the surgery clerkship: a mixed-methods study. Surgery. 2016;160:591–8.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Stepan K, Zeiger J, Hanchuk S, Del Signore A, Shrivastava R, Govindaraj S, et al. Immersive virtual reality as a teaching tool for neuroanatomy: immersive VR as a neuroanatomy teaching tool. Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2017;7:1006–13.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Alnabelsi T, Al-Hussaini A, Owens D. Comparison of traditional face-to-face teaching with synchronous e-learning in otolaryngology emergencies teaching to medical undergraduates: a randomised controlled trial. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272:759–63.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Holland JC, Pawlikowska T. Undergraduate medical students’ usage and perceptions of anatomical case-based learning: comparison of facilitated small group discussions and eLearning resources. Anat Sci Educ. 2019;12:245–56.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Mogali SR, Yeong WY, Tan HKJ, Tan GJS, Abrahams PH, Zary N, et al. Evaluation by medical students of the educational value of multi-material and multi-colored three-dimensional printed models of the upper limb for anatomical education: 3D printed upper limb in anatomical education. Anat Sci Educ. 2018;11:54–64.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Lowell VL, Alshammari A. Experiential learning experiences in an online 3D virtual environment for mental health interviewing and diagnosis role-playing: a comparison of perceived learning across learning activities. Etrd-Educ Technol Res Dev. 2019;67:825–54.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Creutzfeldt J, Hedman L, Fellander-Tsai L. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation training by avatars: a qualitative study of medical students’ experiences using a multiplayer virtual world. Jmir Serious Games. 2016;4:e22.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Harrington CM, Kavanagh DO, Wright Ballester G, Wright Ballester A, Dicker P, Traynor O, et al. 360° operative videos: a randomised cross-over study evaluating attentiveness and information retention. J Surg Educ. 2018;75:993–1000.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Virtanen MA, Haavisto E, Liikanen E, Kaariainen M. Students’ perceptions on the use of a ubiquitous 360 degrees learning environment in histotechnology: a pilot study. J Histotechnol. 2018;41:49–57.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Pickering JD, Bickerdike SR. Medical student use of Facebook to support preparation for anatomy assessments: use of Facebook by medical students. Anat Sci Educ. 2017;10:205–14.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Waseem T, Ashraf MH, Rabbani S, Shoaib H, Khan RA. Evolving role of social networking sites in undergraduate surgical education: student perspective. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2019;13:894–9.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Sattar K, Ahmad T, Abdulghani HM, Khan S, John J, Meo SA. Social networking in medical schools: medical student’s viewpoint. Biomed Res-India. 2016;27:1378–84.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Lehmann R, Seitz A, Bosse HM, Lutz T, Huwendiek S. Student perceptions of a video-based blended learning approach for improving pediatric physical examination skills. Ann Anat-Anat Anz. 2016;208:179–82.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Woodham LA, Ellaway RH, Round J, Vaughan S, Poulton T, Zary N. Medical student and tutor perceptions of video versus text in an interactive online virtual patient for problem-based learning: a pilot study. J Med Internet Res. 2015;17:e151.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Pedersen K, Moeller MH, Paltved C, Mors O, Ringsted C, Morcke AM. Students’ learning experiences from didactic teaching sessions including patient case examples as either text or video: a qualitative study. Acad Psychiatry. 2018;42:622–9.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Prakash SS, Muthuraman N, Anand R. Short-duration podcasts as a supplementary learning tool: perceptions of medical students and impact on assessment performance. Bmc Med Educ. 2017;17:167.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Selzer R, Tallentire VR, Foley F. The effects of utilizing a near-patient e-learning tool on medical student learning. Med Teach. 2015;37:558–65.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sandholzer M, Deutsch T, Frese T, Winter A. Medical students’ attitudes and wishes towards extending an educational general practice app to be suitable for practice: a cross-sectional survey from Leipzig, Germany. Eur J Gen Pract. 2016;22:141–6.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Khamis N, Aljumaiah R, Alhumaid A, Alraheem H, Alkadi D, Koppel C, et al. Undergraduate medical students’ perspectives of skills, uses and preferences of information technology in medical education: a cross-sectional study in a Saudi medical college. Med Teach. 2018;40:S68–76.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Briz-Ponce L, Pereira A, Carvalho L, Antonio Juanes-Mendez J, Jose Garcia-Penalvo F. Learning with mobile technologies - students’ behavior. Comput Hum Behav. 2017;72:612–20.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Jamal A, Temsah M-H, Khan SA, Al-Eyadhy A, Koppel C, Chiang MF. Mobile phone use among medical residents: a cross-sectional multicenter survey in Saudi Arabia. Jmir Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4:136–46.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Naseem A, Ghias K, Sabzwari S, Chauhan S. Perceptions of technology-enhanced learning in undergraduate medical education at a private medical college in Karachi, Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. 2019;69:1108–13.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Back DA, Behringer F, Haberstroh N, Ehlers JP, Sostmann K, Peters H. Learning management system and e-learning tools: an experience of medical students’ usage and expectations. Int J Med Educ. 2016;7:267–73.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Chase TJG, Julius A, Chandan JS, Powell E, Hall CS, Phillips BL, et al. Mobile learning in medicine: an evaluation of attitudes and behaviours of medical students. Bmc Med Educ. 2018;18:152.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Fernando J, Lindley J. Lessons learned from piloting mHealth informatics practice curriculum into a medical elective. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25:380–4.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Tummons J, Fournier C, Kits O, MacLeod A. Teaching without a blackboard and chalk: conflicting attitudes towards using ICTs in higher education teaching and learning. High Educ Res Dev. 2016;35:829–40.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Davis CR, Bates AS, Ellis H, Roberts AM. Human anatomy: let the students tell us how to teach: human anatomy-let the students tell us how to teach. Anat Sci Educ. 2014;7:262–72.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Al-Shorbaji N, Atun RA, Car J, Majeed A, Wheeler E, editors. eLearning for undergraduate health professional education: a systematic review informing a radical transformation of health workforce development [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2015. https://whoeducationguidelines.org/sites/default/files/uploads/eLearning-healthprof-report.pdf. Accessed 21 Jul 2019.

  75. Tsokova Y, Taneva T, Tornyova B, Cherkezov T. Undergraduate healthcare students’ attitude to E-Learning at Medical University - Plovdiv. In: Hajek P, Vit O, Basova P, Krijt M, Paszekova H, Souckova O, et al., editors. Cbu Int Conf Proc 2017 Innov Sci Educ. Prague 8: Central Bohemia Univ; 2017. p. 855–61.

  76. Iqbal S, Shafiq A, Iqbal N. Perceptions of Undergraduate Dental Students towards E-Learning in Lahore Medical and Dental College. Pak J Med Health Sci. 2016;10:1191–3.

  77. Mohammed YA. E-Learning readiness assessment of medical students in University of Fallujah. 2018 1st Annu Int Conf Inf Sci AiCIS [Internet]. Fallujah, Iraq: IEEE. 2018. p. 201–7. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8640902. Accessed 26 Apr 2020.

  78. Ilic D, Nordin RB, Glasziou P, Tilson JK, Villanueva E. A randomised controlled trial of a blended learning education intervention for teaching evidence-based medicine. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15:39.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Khogali SEO, Davies DA, Donnan PT, Gray A, Harden RM, Mcdonald J, et al. Integration of e-learning resources into a medical school curriculum. Med Teach. 2011;33:311–8.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Makhdoom N, Khoshhal KI, Algaidi S, Heissam K, Zolaly MA. ‘Blended learning’ as an effective teaching and learning strategy in clinical medicine: a comparative cross-sectional university-based study. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2013;8:12–7.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Joseph N, Nelliyanil M, Jindal S, Utkarsha, Abraham AE, Alok Y, et al. Perception of simulation based learning among medical students in South India. Ann Med Health Sci Res. 2015;5:247–52.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Zafar M. Medical students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of integrated clinical skills sessions using different simulation adjuncts. Adv Physiol Educ. 2016;40:514–21.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Wise EM, McIvor WR, Mangione MP. Assessing student usage, perception, and the utility of a web-based simulation in a third-year medical school clerkship. J Clin Anesth. 2016;33:5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Habicht JL, Kiessling C, Winkelmann A. Bodies for anatomy education in medical schools: an overview of the sources of cadavers worldwide. Acad Med. 2018;93:1293–300.

    Google Scholar 

  85. Mitsouras D, Liacouras P, Imanzadeh A, Giannopoulos AA, Cai T, Kumamaru KK, et al. Medical 3D printing for the radiologist. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc. 2015;35:1965–88.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Dyer E, Swartzlander BJ, Gugliucci MR. Using virtual reality in medical education to teach empathy. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018;106:498–500.

    Google Scholar 

  87. Munafo J, Diedrick M, Stoffregen TA. The virtual reality head-mounted display Oculus Rift induces motion sickness and is sexist in its effects. Exp Brain Res. 2017;235:889–901.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Ali A. Medical students’ use of Facebook for educational purposes. Perspect Med Educ. 2016;5:163–9.

    Google Scholar 

  89. Cheston CC, Flickinger TE, Chisolm MS. Social media use in medical education: a systematic review. Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Coll. 2013;88:893–901.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Shakoori TA, Mahboob U, Strivens J, Willis I. Impact of a social media group page on undergraduate medical physiology learning. Jcpsp-J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2017;27:409–13.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Tran K, Morra D, Lo V, Quan SD, Abrams H, Wu RC. Medical students and personal smartphones in the clinical environment: the impact on confidentiality of personal health information and professionalism. J Med Internet Res. 2014;16:e132.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Youm J, Wiechmann W. Medical student use of the iPad in the clerkship curriculum. Clin Teach. 2015;12:378–83.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Boruff JT, Storie D. Mobile devices in medicine: a survey of how medical students, residents, and faculty use smartphones and other mobile devices to find information. J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102:22–30.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Rodis J, Aungst TD, Brown NV, Cui Y, Tam L. Enhancing pharmacy student learning and perceptions of medical apps. Jmir Mhealth Uhealth. 2016;4:581–8.

    Google Scholar 

  95. Jaffar AA. YouTube: an emerging tool in anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ. 2012;5:158–64.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Ocak MA, Topal AD. Blended learning in anatomy education: a study investigating medical students’ perceptions. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ. 2015;11:647–83.

    Google Scholar 

  97. Hurst KM. Using video podcasting to enhance the learning of clinical skills: a qualitative study of physiotherapy students’ experiences. Nurse Educ Today. 2016;45:206–11.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Ravizza SM, Hambrick DZ, Fenn KM. Non-academic internet use in the classroom is negatively related to classroom learning regardless of intellectual ability. Comput Educ. 2014;78:109–14.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Tossell CC, Kortum P, Shepard C, Rahmati A, Zhong L. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him learn: smartphone use in higher education. Br J Educ Technol. 2015;46:713–24.

    Google Scholar 

  100. Phelps M, Scott KM, Chauffete-Manillier M, Lenne F, Le Jeunne C. Mobile devices, learning and clinical workplaces: medical student use of smartphones in Parisian hospitals. Br J Educ Technol. 2017;48:1330–44.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lukáš Plch.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Plch, L. Perception of Technology-Enhanced Learning by Medical Students: an Integrative Review. Med.Sci.Educ. 30, 1707–1720 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01040-w

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01040-w

Keywords

Navigation