Background & Objective Medical schools have evolved toward competency-based education and active learner-centered strategies. Medical informatics course was introduced in 2011 in the 3rd year at the College of Medicine (CoM), King Saud University (KSU), to enhance future medical graduates with technological and information competencies. Modified team-based learning and blended learning were emphasized using face-to-face lectures, various e-learning technologies, workshop and seminars. The current study’s main objective was to assess students’ perceptions towards blended and modified team-based learning at the CoM in KSU. Methods A survey was distributed to medical students in three consecutive years: 2017–2019. The survey contains items regarding student perception of various types of blended learning techniques applied in the course. The survey was administered using i-Clicker; an interactive device that enables students to answer survey questions. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the perception of students on these blended learning dimensions investigated. Results Seven-hundred and one student responded to the questionnaire (male; 69.5%, female 30.5%). Out of which, 59.1% of students found team interactions positively supported discussions and asked questions freely, and 48.1% expressed that working in groups facilitated their learning process. However, 56.0% of students chose face-to-face lectures as the most preferred class activities followed by discussion 23.8%. More than 78% of participants agree that online quizzes are good experience and enjoyable. Grade center where students can check for marks and attendance also received high perception (66.3%). Conclusion Introducing modified team-based and blended-learning are considered challenging, and therefore, investigating their perceptions can provide useful insights into how these methods could be used more effectively. The blended-learning technique is highly essential in teaching medical informatics to overcome challenges faced due to a large number of students and the need for various exposures to reach the course’s learning goals. Moreover, it is noticed that students were engaged in face-to-face and online activities, furthermore, modified team-based learning reported facilitating learning and asking questions without embarrassment.

Background Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is an innovative student-centered learning method that has been implemented in numerous medical colleges worldwide. However, the newly adopting PBL institutes may face challenges during its implementation. This study aims to evaluate PBL implementation in the medical college of Imam Abdulrahman bin Faisal University (IAU) from the facilitators’ and students’ perspectives. Methods This is a cross-sectional study using a quantitative self-administered online questionnaire. The questionnaire evaluated PBL implementation using the three scales: small group learning, problem case scenario, and facilitator role. A total of 52 facilitators and 1289 students (from second to sixth years) were invited to participate in the study at the end of the 2019–2020 academic year. Results Forty-six facilitators (88.46%) and 324 students (25.13%) responded to the questionnaire. There was an overall positive evaluation of PBL implementation. However, the facilitators’ rating was significantly higher than the students’ rating across the three scales. Regarding the small group learning, a significant difference was found between types of facilitation status (p = 0.017) and between trained and not trained facilitators (p = 0.029). In respect to the problem case scenario, there was a significant difference based on the types of facilitation status (p = 0.017) and facilitating tutorials related to the facilitator’s specialty (p = 0.004). Regarding the facilitator role, a significant difference was found between the academic year they had facilitated (p = 0.032). Female students rated the three scales significantly higher than male students (p < 0.001). Students aged between 24 and 25 years old and sixth years students also rated the three scales significantly higher than other students (P < 0.05). Conclusions The participants rated PBL implementation positively as measured by the three scales rating. However, specific concerns have been highlighted that are related to group dynamics, training before starting PBL, relevancy of the case scenarios, and the facilitator’s role in nominating group members and providing feedback.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted the use of telemedicine application (apps), which has seen an uprise. This study evaluated the usability of the user interface design of telemedicine apps deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia. It also explored changes to the apps’ usability based on the pandemic timeline. Methods: We screened ten mHealth apps published by the National Digital Transformation Unit and selected three telemedicine apps: (1) governmental “Seha”® app, (2) stand-alone “Cura”® app, and (3) private “Dr. Sulaiman Alhabib”®app. We conducted the evaluations in April 2020 and in June 2021 by identifying positive app features, using Nielsen’s ten usability heuristics with a five-point severity rating scale, and documenting redesign recommendations. Results: We identified 54 user interface usability issues during both evaluation periods: 18 issues in “Seha” 14 issues in “Cura”, and 22 issues in “Dr. Sulaiman Alhabib”. The two most heuristic items violated in “Seha”, were “user control and freedom” and “recognition rather than recall”. In “Cura”, the three most heuristic items violated were “consistency and adherence to standards”, “esthetic and minimalist design”, and “help and documentation” In “Dr. Sulaiman Alhabib” the most heuristic item violated was “error prevention”. Ten out of the thirty usability issues identified from our first evaluation were no longer identified during our second evaluation. Conclusions: our findings indicate that all three apps have a room for improving their user interface designs to improve the overall user experience and to ensure the continuity of these services beyond the pandemic.

Despite the importance of electronic health records data, less attention has been given to data quality. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of COVID-19 patients’ records and their readiness for secondary use. We conducted a retrospective chart review study of all COVID-19 inpatients in an academic healthcare hospital for the year 2020, which were identified using ICD-10 codes and case definition guidelines. COVID-19 signs and symptoms were higher in unstructured clinical notes than in structured coded data. COVID-19 cases were categorized as 218 (66.46%) “confirmed cases”, 10 (3.05%) “probable cases”, 9 (2.74%) “suspected cases”, and 91 (27.74%) “no sufficient evidence”. The identification of “probable cases” and “suspected cases” was more challenging than “confirmed cases” where laboratory confirmation was sufficient. The accuracy of the COVID-19 case identification was higher in laboratory tests than in ICD-10 codes. When validating using laboratory results, we found that ICD-10 codes were inaccurately assigned to 238 (72.56%) patients’ records. “No sufficient evidence” records might indicate inaccurate and incomplete EHR data. Data quality evaluation should be incorporated to ensure patient safety and data readiness for secondary use research and predictive analytics. We encourage educational and training efforts to motivate healthcare providers regarding the importance of accurate documentation at the point-of-care.

Objective: Understanding health informatics (HI) publication trends in Saudi Arabia may serve as a framework for future research efforts and contribute toward meeting national “e-Health” goals. The authors’ intention was to understand the state of the HI field in Saudi Arabia by exploring publication trends and their alignment with national goals.Methods: A scoping review was performed to identify HI publications from Saudi Arabia in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. We analyzed publication trends based on topics, keywords, and how they align with the Ministry of Health’s (MOH’s) “digital health journey” framework.Results: The total number of publications included was 242. We found 1 (0.4%) publication in 1995–1999, 11 (4.5%) publications in 2000–2009, and 230 (95.0%) publications in 2010–2019. We categorized publications into 3 main HI fields and 4 subfields: 73.1% (n=177) of publications were in clinical informatics (85.1%, n=151 medical informatics; 5.6%, n=10 pharmacy informatics; 6.8%, n=12 nursing informatics; 2.3%, n=4 dental informatics); 22.3% (n=54) were in consumer health informatics; and 4.5% (n=11) were in public health informatics. The most common keyword was “medical informatics” (21.5%, n=52). MOH framework–based analysis showed that most publications were categorized as “digitally enabled care” and “digital health foundations.”Conclusions:The years of 2000–2009 may be seen as an infancy stage of the HI field in Saudi Arabia. Exploring how the Saudi Arabian MOH’s e-Health initiatives may influence research is valuable for advancing the field. Data exchange and interoperability, artificial intelligence, and intelligent health enterprises might be future research directions in Saudi Arabia.