BMC medical education · 2026
Usage patterns, perceived barriers and perceived impact of mobile medical applications in medical education and clinical practice: a cross-sectional study among medical students and junior doctors in Sudan.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ahmed Alemam Awad Alameen, Ali Weam Babeker Ahmed, Mohammedalhassan Aliya Elsir Alhaj, Mohamed Mohamedelborae Abdalgafar Elimam, Eldouma Mohemedelmustafa Yahya Mohamed, Mohammed Amjed Siddig Khalid, Mohammed Abeer Mohammed Sayed, Elshafie Ragaa Mohammed, Hussein Fal Muawia AbdAlla, Tawfeeg Alaa Azhari Madani, Ahmed Ldan Abdelgader Wageialla, Elkhidir Raheeg Sayed Mohamed Ali, Abdallah Saneia Abdalsalm Abakar, Eljack Mohammed Mahmmoud Fadelallah
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Mobile medical apps have greatly enhanced access to healthcare information and clinical decision-making globally. However, their use in Sudan faces numerous barriers, despite the growing adoption worldwide. There is limited information on how Sudanese medical students and healthcare providers utilize these apps, the challenges they face, and how these tools affect clinical decisions. This study aimed to examine usage patterns, perceived barriers, and perceived impact of mobile medical applications on clinical decision-making and learning among medical students and junior doctors in Sudan to inform future digital curriculum integration.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among medical students in the clinical phase (4th, 5th, and 6th years), house officers, and general practitioners practicing in Sudan. Data were collected using a self-administered online questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 2,945 participants completed the survey, including medical students (66.3%) and house officers or general practitioners (33.7%). Overall, 94% owned a smartphone or tablet capable of running medical applications. 80% reported using mobile medical apps during clinical training or practice, with significantly higher use among house officers and GPs than among medical students (89.0% vs. 75.0%; p < 0.001). Usage patterns differed by academic level, with junior doctors more often using clinically oriented apps for guideline reviews, drug information verification, treatment decisions, and on-call or emergencies. In contrast, students mainly used apps for academic reviews and exam preparation. The most common barrier was the cost of a paid subscription (48.0%). Participants generally viewed mobile medical applications positively, considering them accurate, time-saving, confidence-boosting, and helpful for inpatient care.
CONCLUSION: The widespread use of medical apps, particularly among junior doctors, suggests a high readiness for digital integration; however, addressing subscription costs and providing institutional training is essential to bridge the gap between academic study and clinical application.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted among medical students in the clinical phase (4th, 5th, and 6th years), house officers, and general practitioners practicing in Sudan. Data were collected using a self-administered online questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 2,945 participants completed the survey, including medical students (66.3%) and house officers or general practitioners (33.7%). Overall, 94% owned a smartphone or tablet capable of running medical applications. 80% reported using mobile medical apps during clinical training or practice, with significantly higher use among house officers and GPs than among medical students (89.0% vs. 75.0%; p < 0.001). Usage patterns differed by academic level, with junior doctors more often using clinically oriented apps for guideline reviews, drug information verification, treatment decisions, and on-call or emergencies. In contrast, students mainly used apps for academic reviews and exam preparation. The most common barrier was the cost of a paid subscription (48.0%). Participants generally viewed mobile medical applications positively, considering them accurate, time-saving, confidence-boosting, and helpful for inpatient care.
CONCLUSION: The widespread use of medical apps, particularly among junior doctors, suggests a high readiness for digital integration; however, addressing subscription costs and providing institutional training is essential to bridge the gap between academic study and clinical application.