{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0348993288590604, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008053691275167786, 'mean_word_length': 5.176795580110498, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Interactive computer-assisted learning program for diagnosis and therapy of recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis].

BACKGROUND
With the increasing capacity of personal computers more and more multimedia training programs are becoming available which make use of these possibilities. Computer-based presentation is usually interesting because it is visually attractive. However, the extent to which computer-based training programs correspond to international standards of quality of software ergonomics has never been the subject of systematic research. Another question is how much these programs motivate learning and what increase in knowledge can be achieved by using them.


METHODS AND RESULTS
Using a multimedia interactive training program developed in our facility, 100 medical students were asked to evaluate the program after they had been using it for about one hour. In a questionnaire they first rated suitability for the task, self-descriptiveness, controllability, conformity with user expectation, error tolerance, suitability for individualization, and suitability for learning on a bipolar scale from "---" to "+3" (in numbers 1, worst result, to 7, best result). The median values achieved were rated between 6.0 and 6.2--software ergonomic criteria of the program ranged from good to very good. The second part was a subjective evaluation of the program's ability to deliver "medical knowledge which is relevant for the exam" (median = 6.0), "knowledge about systematic procedure in medicine" (median = 5.5), "knowledge about sensible use of diagnostic methods" (median = 6.0), "knowledge about clinical methods", and "experience with selective learning" (median = 6.0). This part was also rated good to very good. The third part of the questionnaire involved a pretest-posttest comparison. Two groups of students were asked how much benefit they had achieved by using the program. It was shown that the students were able to answer the exam questions significantly better than the control questions after they had used the program.


CONCLUSION
This study confirms that the interactive computer-based training program is very well suited for providing knowledge in on appealing manner in an instructional setting.