Educational study demonstrates high engagement and satisfaction for a 30-day skull base curriculum via WhatsApp in global health trainees, highlighting its feasibility for scalable specialty training.
Aim Virtual learning is increasingly used in medical education, with emerging evidence supporting its feasibility and impact. The Vestibular Schwannoma (VS) Challenge delivered a free 30-day programme on VS diagnosis and management to a global audience using WhatsApp. This study assessed the effectiveness of WhatsApp as a platform for skull base education and gathered user feedback to inform future programme design. Methods A Birmingham-based collaboration of skull base multidisciplinary team members, residents, allied health professionals, and medical students delivered daily video lessons and/or written content via WhatsApp. Participants were invited to complete a multiple-choice quiz on VS and a feedback survey evaluating WhatsApp as a learning platform. Quantitative Likert-scale responses (1–5) were summarised using means and frequencies, while free-text responses underwent thematic analysis. Results A total of 363 participants joined the programme, with minimal attrition (three withdrawals). Sixty-five participants (18%) completed the final quiz, achieving a mean score of 65%. Fifty-seven participants (16%) completed the feedback survey, with similar representation across consultants, residents, allied health professionals, and students. Satisfaction ratings were high (mean helpfulness 4.40 ± 0.62), with 93% rating the challenge ≥4. Most respondents (85%) endorsed the “bite-sized” daily format, and 98% found WhatsApp an effective learning tool. Participants reported substantial engagement, with 39% viewing ≥75% of the content. Limitations of the free WhatsApp version included lack of automation, analytics, and restricted file sizes. Conclusion The VS Challenge demonstrates that WhatsApp is a feasible, accessible, and well-received platform for global medical education. This low-cost, scalable model may inform future subspecialty training initiatives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rajendran et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: