000355
10.3205/000355
urn:nbn:de:0183-0003559
Research Article
Requirements and attitudes toward eHealth content in human medicine studies: A cross-sectional study to improve the curriculum
Bedarfe und Einstellungen zu eHealth-Inhalten im Humanmedizinstudium: Eine Querschnittsstudie zur Weiterentwicklung des Curriculums
Traulsen
Traulsen
Pia
P
Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, GermanyInstitut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany
pia.traulsen@uni-luebeck.de
author
Stamer
Stamer
Tjorven
T
Dr.
Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany
t.stamer@uni-luebeck.de
author
Steinhäuser
Steinhäuser
Jost
J
Prof. Dr. med.
Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Germany
jost.steinhaeuser@uksh.de
author
German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
Düsseldorf
610
eHealth
telemedicine
undergraduate training
students
alumni
curriculum
Germany
eHealth
Telemedizin
Medizinstudium
Studenten
Alumni
Lehrplan
Deutschland
Medical Education
20251016
20251103
20260113
engl
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung).
1612-3174
24
GMS German Medical Science
GMS Ger Med Sci
02
Institut für Allgemeinmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck
Zielsetzung: Diese Studie untersucht die aktuelle Integration von <![CDATA[eHealth</PlainText></TextGroup>-Inhalten in das Medizinstudium an der Universität zu Luebeck. Ziel ist es zu erheben, wie Studierende und Alumni die Lehre zu eHealth-Aspekten erinnern und ihr Wissen, ihre Sicherheit und ihre Vorbereitung auf den Einsatz digitaler Anwendungen in der klinischen Praxis einschätzen. Die Ergebnisse können bei der Weiterentwicklung des Curriculums helfen.</Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Methoden:</Mark1> Es wurde eine Querschnittsstudie mittels Online-Fragebogen unter derzeit eingeschriebenen Medizinstudierenden sowie Absolvent*innen (Abschluss innerhalb der letzten fünf Jahre) der Universität zu Luebeck durchgeführt. Der Fragebogen erfasste Einstellungen gegenüber eHealth, das subjektiv eingeschätzte Wissen, die Nutzungskompetenz sowie die im Studium vermittelten Inhalte. Die Daten wurden deskriptiv ausgewertet, Zusammenhänge mittels Spearman-Rho-Korrelationen und Mann-Whitney-U-Test untersucht.</Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Ergebnisse:</Mark1> Insgesamt wurden 131 Fragebögen ausgewertet (Studierende: n=76, Alumni: n=54). Während 70% der Studierenden angaben, eHealth-Inhalte im Studium behandelt zu haben, traf dies nur auf 19% der Alumni zu. Insgesamt berichteten jedoch 51% der Befragten, dass eHealth kein Bestandteil ihres Curriculums war. Am häufigsten genannt wurden Inhalte zur elektronischen Patientenakte (ePA), zum eRezept sowie zu Kommunikationsplattformen wie Kommunikation im Gesundheitswesen (KIM) und Messenger der Telematik (TIM).</Pgraph><Pgraph>Das subjektiv eingeschätzte eHealth-Wissen korrelierte stark mit dem empfundenen Vertrauen im Umgang mit eHealth-Anwendungen sowie mit dem Gefühl der Vorbereitung auf den beruflichen Einsatz. Die wahrgenommene Sicherheit war der stärkste Prädiktor für das Gefühl beruflicher Vorbereitung. Auch Geschlecht und Alter zeigten Zusammenhänge: Männer schätzten ihr Wissen höher ein, jüngere Teilnehmende berichteten häufiger von eHealth-Inhalten im Studium.</Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Schlussfolgerung:</Mark1> Die Ergebnisse verdeutlichen große Unterschiede in der Wahrnehmung der eHealth-Lehre und zeigen signifikante Zusammenhänge zwischen Wissen, Sicherheit und Vorbereitung auf die digitale Berufspraxis. Die Teilnehmenden äußerten einen deutlichen Bedarf an umfassenderer und strukturierterer Lehre zu digitalen Gesundheitskompetenzen. Zentrale Themen für die zukünftige curriculare Integration sind digitale Dokumentationssysteme, Telemedizin, Datenschutz und der Einsatz von Künstlicher Intelligenz in der Medizin. Eine systematische und langfristige Einbindung dieser Themen in Pflicht- und Wahllehrveranstaltungen ist essenziell, um angehende Ärzt*innen angemessen auf ein zunehmend digitalisiertes Gesundheitssystem vorzubereiten.</Pgraph></Abstract>
<Abstract language="en" linked="yes"><Pgraph><Mark1>Objective:</Mark1> This study investigates the current integration of eHealth content into the medical curriculum at the University of Luebeck. The aim is to explore how students and alumni remember e-health teaching content und to assess their knowledge, confidence and preparedness for using digital applications in clinical practice. The results can help with the further development of the curriculum.</Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Methods:</Mark1> A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among current medical students and alumni (graduation within the last five years) of the University of Luebeck. The questionnaire assessed participants’ attitudes toward eHealth, their self-assessed knowledge and confidence, and the eHealth content taught during their studies. Data were analyzed descriptively, and associations between key variables were examined using Spearman’s rank correlation and Mann-Whitney U test.</Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Results:</Mark1> A total of 131 responses were analyzed (students: n=76, alumni: n=54). While students reported more frequent exposure to eHealth content (70%) than alumni (19%), overall, 51% indicated that no eHealth instruction had been part of their curriculum. The most common taught topics included the electronic patient record (ePA), ePrescriptions, and communication platforms like Communication in healthcare (KIM) and Telematics messenger (TIM).</Pgraph><Pgraph>Self-assessed knowledge of eHealth showed strong correlations with perceived confidence and preparedness. Confidence in using eHealth applications strongly predicted perceived preparedness. Gender and age were also found to be relevant factors: male participants reported higher knowledge levels, and younger participants more frequently encountered eHealth content.</Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Conclusions:</Mark1> The findings highlight substantial variability in the perception of eHealth teaching and reveal significant associations between perceived knowledge, confidence, and readiness for professional application. Participants expressed a clear need for broader and more structured digital health education. Core topics identified for future curricular integration include digital documentation systems, telemedicine, data protection, and the use of AI in healthcare. Comprehensive, longitudinal integration of eHealth across core and elective curricula is essential to adequately prepare future physicians for an increasingly digitalized healthcare system.</Pgraph></Abstract>
<TextBlock name="Introduction" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Introduction</MainHeadline><Pgraph>The integration of eHealth into medical education varies internationally. For instance, in the United States, eHealth has been incorporated into medical school curricula to prepare students for the digital transformation of the healthcare system <TextLink reference="1"></TextLink>. There is evidence that the implementation of eHealth competencies in medical education increases students’ willingness to adopt technological solutions in their future practice <TextLink reference="2"></TextLink>. In the Netherlands, a nationwide program has been developed to integrate eHealth into medical education. This program aims to enhance medical students’ digital skills and improve their attitudes toward eHealth. Preliminary findings suggest that such initiatives can foster students’ confidence in using digital technologies <TextLink reference="2"></TextLink>. In Australia, Universities have started incorporating eHealth components into their curricula to ensure that future physicians can effectively manage digital health technologies <TextLink reference="1"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="3"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>With the introduction of the Digital Act (DigiG) in 2023, the digitalization of the healthcare sector is set to accelerate in Germany. Among other measures, the electronic prescription (ePrescription) and the electronic patient record (ePA) have been implemented nationwide <TextLink reference="4"></TextLink>. However, to practice successfully within these new healthcare structures, appropriate knowledge is required <TextLink reference="5"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Research conducted in Germany highlights that a more comprehensive integration of eHealth into medical education is lacking <TextLink reference="5"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="6"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="7"></TextLink>. A significant proportion of medical students express a demand for expanded curricular content in this area to ensure adequate preparation for their professional careers <TextLink reference="8"></TextLink>. Similarly, alumni report a continued need for further training in digital health competencies <TextLink reference="9"></TextLink>. Recognizing these challenges, the German Medical Association proposed a resolution at the 122<Superscript>nd</Superscript> German Medical Assembly in 2019, emphasizing the urgent necessity of curriculum adjustments to better equip medical students for the increasing digitalization of healthcare <TextLink reference="10"></TextLink>. To develop targeted improvements, an initial assessment of the currently taught eHealth-related topics and their scope within medical curricula is essential.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Since 2021, the National Catalogue of Competence-based Learning Objectives for Medicine (NKLM) has been updated to include telemedicine content as a mandatory component. Among other things, students should be able to explain ‘application scenarios for telemedicine and their framework conditions’ as well as ‘telemedicine aspects of emergency medicine’ after completing their studies <TextLink reference="11"></TextLink>. Universities in Germany are responding differently to the new digital requirements. For instance, the University of Giessen has developed a specialized curriculum entitled ‘Digital Medicine, eHealth and Telemedicine’ <TextLink reference="12"></TextLink>. At the University of Marburg, medical students have the option of taking the elective course ‘Medicine in the Digital Age’ <TextLink reference="13"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>At the University of Luebeck, eHealth content is currently integrated into the compulsory curriculum, including general medicine (with an OSCE station), medical sociology, and medical informatics <TextLink reference="8"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="14"></TextLink>. Since 2022, eHealth content has been taught, e.g. in a 90-minute seminar, in the general medicine module <TextLink reference="15"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="16"></TextLink>. In medical sociology, eHealth content has been taught for six hours since 2019 <TextLink reference="8"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="15"></TextLink>. The Institute of Family Medicine teaching is basically based on the content of the book ‘Telemedicine and eHealth’, which was published in 2021 <TextLink reference="17"></TextLink>. The medical informatics module includes the lecture series ‘Medical Documentation’ and the seminar ‘Health Telematics and Telemedicine,’ which have been taught since 2003 <TextLink reference="15"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="18"></TextLink>. There is currently no independent module as a compulsory or elective subject on eHealth or telemedicine at the University of Luebeck <TextLink reference="14"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>The aim of this study was to assess the memory regarding teaching content related to eHealth for medical students for all the subjects at the University of Luebeck. The students’ perception of the eHealth content taught is to be examined. </Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Methods" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Methods</MainHeadline><SubHeadline>Study design and population</SubHeadline><Pgraph>A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire to assess the integration of eHealth content into the medical curriculum at the University of Luebeck. The study population comprised currently enrolled medical students as well as alumni who graduated within the past five years. At the time of the survey, approximately 1,600 students were enrolled in the medical program at the University of Luebeck <TextLink reference="19"></TextLink>. Participants were recruited via email distribution lists from November 2024 until July 2025, ensuring broad coverage of both student and alumni groups. Eligibility criteria included a minimum age of 18 years, proficiency in the German language, and prior written informed consent for study participation. Only individuals meeting these criteria were included in the study sample.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Ethics and data security</SubHeadline><Pgraph>Data collection was conducted for the purpose of the aforementioned research project. The data was recorded, stored, and analyzed in anonymized form. The provision of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was strictly adhered to <TextLink reference="20"></TextLink>. Access to the questionnaire data is restricted to study staff members, all of whom are bound by confidentiality agreements. The data is protected against unauthorized access, and third parties will not have access to the original records. The data was stored at the Institute of Family Medicine, University of Luebeck, and will be deleted after a period of 10 years. The study was approved by by the Ethics Committee of the University of Luebeck on 30.09.2024 (file number: 2024-533).</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Questionnaire</SubHeadline><Pgraph>The survey was conducted using the online platform SurveyMonkey (San Mateo, CA) <TextLink reference="21"></TextLink>. The data was collected anonymously, ensuring that no conclusions could be drawn about individual participants. The questionnaire contains questions on personal attitudes and usage behavior of eHealth, the current status of teaching units in medical curricula, how confident the participants feel in using eHealth applications and which topics they would have liked to have covered. Demographic information included gender, age, and either the current semester of study or the date of graduation. The questionnaire can be found in Attachment 1 <AttachmentLink attachmentNo="1" />.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Analyses</SubHeadline><Pgraph>Data analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics software (Armonk, NY), version 29 <TextLink reference="22"></TextLink>. The data was first analyzed descriptively. Ordinal data were recorded using a 6-point Likert scale. This was based on the school grading system in Germany. 1 stands for very good or very high and 6 for very poor or very low.</Pgraph><Pgraph>In addition, the variables were tested for normal distribution using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. If the data was not normally distributed, non-parametric tests were calculated. The Mann-Whitney U test was used for the group comparison. To explore the associations between key variables related to eHealth, non-parametric correlation analyses were conducted using Spearman’s rank-order correlation (Spearman-Rho). Correlations were computed between variables such as general attitude toward eHealth, self-assessed knowledge, perceived confidence in using eHealth applications, and perceived preparedness for professional use. In addition, associations with sociodemographic variables (e.g., gender, age, role) and reported curricular exposure to eHealth were examined. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05 for all analyses. </Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Results" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Results</MainHeadline><Pgraph>In total, 131 questionnaires were completed. Table 1 <ImgLink imgNo="1" imgType="table" /> shows the sociodemographic data of the participants.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Table 2 <ImgLink imgNo="2" imgType="table" /> shows the general attitude of the participants towards eHealth and their knowledge of eHealth. It also shows how comfortable and prepared the participants feel. </Pgraph><Pgraph>Table 3 <ImgLink imgNo="3" imgType="table" /> provides an overview of which applications the participants use privately. It also shows whether and which eHealth content was taught in the curriculum.</Pgraph><Pgraph>eHealth was mainly remembered getting taught in the subjects of general medicine (29%), medical sociology (32%) and medical informatics (7%). Individual participants also stated lectures in pharmacology, psychology and prevention and health. </Pgraph><Pgraph>The respondents were also asked which subjects they would have liked to hear (more of) in the curriculum. Th<TextGroup><PlainText>e f</PlainText></TextGroup>ollowing topics were listed: general overview (“everything”), importance for patient care, data protection, possible applications, legal framework, ePA, ePrescription, Digital health applications (DiGA), video consultation, artificial intelligence (AI), KIM, TIM and messaging apps. </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Correlational analyses</SubHeadline><Pgraph><Mark2>Attitude toward eHealth</Mark2> showed a moderate positive correlation with <Mark2>knowledge about eHealth</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=0.29, p<.001). <Mark2>Knowledge about eHealth</Mark2> was strongly positively correlated with <Mark2>confidence in using eHealth applications</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=0.551, p<.001) and <Mark2>perceived preparedness</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=0.514, p<.001). <Mark2>Confidence in using eHealth applic</Mark2><TextGroup><Mark2>a</Mark2></TextGroup><Mark2></Mark2><Mark2>tions</Mark2> was strongly associated with <Mark2>perceived preparedness</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=0.721, p<.001). A small but significant correlation was found between <Mark2>gender</Mark2> and <Mark2>knowledge about eHealth</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=–0.240, p=.006), with male participants rating their knowledge slightly higher. The presence of <Mark2>eHealth content in the curriculum</Mark2> was positively associated with <Mark2>perceived preparedness</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=0.302, p<.001). <Mark2>Age</Mark2> showed a negative correlation with reported <Mark2>eHealth content in the curriculum</Mark2> (r<Subscript>rho</Subscript>=–0.362, p<.001), suggesting that younger participants more frequently encountered eHealth-related teaching.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Subgroup analysis</SubHeadline><Pgraph>Subgroup analyses were performed with the variables on attitude and knowledge. Table 4 <ImgLink imgNo="4" imgType="table" /> shows the group analysis based on the variable on <Mark2>eHealth content in the curriculum</Mark2>, showing a difference in perceived preparedness.</Pgraph><Pgraph>The comparison of the subgroups by <Mark2>Role (students vs. alumni)</Mark2> with the variables on attitude and knowledge showed that there was no difference in the variables. Table 5 <ImgLink imgNo="5" imgType="table" /> shows a difference in <Mark2>knowledge about eHealth</Mark2> and <Mark2>confidence in using eHealth applications</Mark2>. </Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Discussion" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Discussion</MainHeadline><Pgraph>The study sought to determine the scope and specific topics covered in the curriculum at the University of Luebeck. It also aimed to show how comfortable and prepared the participants feel for everyday practice.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Overall, the analyses support the assumption that <Mark2>knowle</Mark2><TextGroup><Mark2>d</Mark2></TextGroup><Mark2>ge about eHealth</Mark2>, <Mark2>confidence in using eHealth applications</Mark2>, and <Mark2>eHealth content in curriculum</Mark2> are mutually reinforcing factors and are linked to a more positive <Mark2>attitude toward eHealth</Mark2> and <Mark2>perceived preparedness</Mark2>. Correlational analyses within our study emphasize the critical relationship between self-assessed eHealth knowledge and students’ readiness and confidence in applying eHealth professionally. These findings are consistent with other studies, who noted that students often feel underprepared for digital practice but express a strong desire for more robust training <TextLink reference="2"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="23"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="24"></TextLink>. Our data revealed that the confidence in using eHealth applications and the perceived preparedness for the job are strongly correlated, echoing prior work that suggested experiential learning significantly boosts digital competence <TextLink reference="25"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="26"></TextLink>. The taught eHealth content in the curriculum and its influence on the perceived preparedness for the job highlight the layered nature of digital competency, suggesting that fostering confidence through hands-on, clinically relevant training is essential. This is corroborated by the success of structured, multi-institutional telemedicine curricula which yielded high student satisfaction and knowledge gain <TextLink reference="25"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="27"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>The role of gender also warrants attention, as male students rated their <Mark2>knowledge about eHealth</Mark2> higher than the female participants did, consistent with previously documented gender differences in digital self-efficacy <TextLink reference="28"></TextLink>. This aligns with other research. It is consistently indicated that men tend to overestimate their abilities, while women often underestimate theirs, despite comparable actual performance levels. This phenomenon, sometimes referred to as the “male hubris, female humility” effect, has been observed across various domains <TextLink reference="29"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="30"></TextLink>. These disparities in self-assessment have tangible implications. A study examining medical students’ self-evaluations found that female students rated their performance significantly lower than peer assessments, while male students’ self-assessments closely matched peer evaluations. Such underestimation by women can influence career advancement opportunities, as self-promotion plays a crucial role in professional growth. Understanding and addressing these gender-based differences in self-perception is essential for fostering equity in educational and professional settings <TextLink reference="31"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>The age of the participants and the Content of eHealth in Curriculum were inversely correlated, indicating that younger students may benefit from newer curriculum reforms or increased digital exposure during early training.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Students’ demand for broader eHealth content – ranging from data protection and AI to ePrescriptions and ePA – furtherr underscores a curricular gap. This reflects findings from other studies, who reported a lack of systematic coverage of emerging technologies like AI and Internet of Things (IoT) despite their growing relevance in clinical practice <TextLink reference="3"></TextLink>. The integration of eHealth education into medical curricula remains inconsistent, as reflected in our findings. This aligns with earlier research indicating a fragmented approach to digital health training, often relegated to elective modules or isolated teaching units without standardized curricula across institutions <TextLink reference="1"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="8"></TextLink>. Notably, the preference for general medicine and sociology as instructional contexts may stem from their adaptability to evolving topics such as patient communication, digital literacy, and systems thinking. This trend is evident in German programs, where medical sociology has been a common platform for exploring digital transformation themes <TextLink reference="8"></TextLink>. Both medical sociology and general medicine are proposed in the NKLM in order to include telemedicine content in the curriculum <TextLink reference="11"></TextLink>. The minimal inclusion in medical informatics is concerning, particularly given that most digital tools and applications are inherently rooted in informatics principles <TextLink reference="32"></TextLink>. However, it should be considered that it is also possible that students may not remember the eHealth aspects that were taught. In this case, a new implementation strategy could help to sustainably promote knowledge among students. For instance, it would be conceivable to include an additional elective subject on eHealth in the curriculum. This has already been successful at the University of Mainz and could also be adapted in Luebeck <TextLink reference="33"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="34"></TextLink>. The evaluation showed that hands-on components and practical content were particularly conducive to learning success. The methodological diversity and scope of the modules were also highlighted as positive aspects <TextLink reference="26"></TextLink>. In terms of methodology, particular attention should be paid to ensuring that students are actively involved and that what they have learned is repeated promptly <TextLink reference="26"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="35"></TextLink>. Digital health education should be systematically embedded in both core and elective curricula to ensure that all students – not just those opting into specialized modules – are equipped for digital practice <TextLink reference="27"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="32"></TextLink>. Increasing the number of longitudinal planned teaching units on the subject of eHealth may be useful in order to ensure that the topics are remembered in the long term. In doing so, the university should create the conditions for incorporating new content by reducing other to not overstrain the students and enable teaching staff to catch up with the developments in this field <TextLink reference="24"></TextLink>.</Pgraph><Pgraph>One aspect that was not considered in this study is the eLearning platform for students provided by the University of Luebeck. It is available to all students and here as well, eHealth content is available for further research <TextLink reference="36"></TextLink>. Whether and to what extent this is used by the students is not shown in this study. This should be taken into account in the further development of eHealth content in the curriculum.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Strengths and limitations</SubHeadline><Pgraph>A strength of this study is that all current students (1<Superscript>st</Superscript> of November 2024) from the University of Luebeck were contacted via email distribution lists. Nevertheless, response rates cannot be calculated as different university mailing lists were used. Students and alumni may appear on more than one mailing list and may have received the request twice or never. It is not possible to draw conclusions about how many alumni have been contacted, as there is no number available. Due to the small number of participants, the results cannot be extrapolated to the entire student body at the University of Luebeck. Despite anonymous questionnaires, it is possible that the participants were biased towards answers they perceived to be desirable. In addition, recall bias is possible and must be considered in the interpretation, especially among alumni, since their studies were completed a few years ago. It should also be noted that students in their first to third semesters could not yet have covered eHealth content, as this is only taught for the first time in the fourth semester in Medical Sociology. It is also important to consider that people who are interested in the topic of telemedicine are more inclined to take part in a survey <TextLink reference="37"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="38"></TextLink>.</Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Conclusion" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Conclusion</MainHeadline><Pgraph>This study highlights the current limitations and potential of eHealth education within medical curricula. While subjects such as general medicine and medical sociology provide an entry point for eHealth-related topics, the low representation in other subjects and the low number of lessons emphasizes a significant structural gap. It is also shown, that despite the fact that eHealth is taught, it is not remembered much by students. Given the strong associations between self-assessed eHealth knowledge, confidence, and perceived professional preparedness, it is imperative that digital health training be expanded and better integrated into core curricula.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Based on the results of the study, aspects such as the fundamentals and implications of digital health technologies, data protection and legal framework and secure communication platforms such as KIM and TIM should be (more) integrated into the curriculum. This would meet the needs expressed by students from the University of Luebeck and the demands of an increasingly digital healthcare system.</Pgraph><Pgraph>Incorporating these components into both compulsory teaching formats is essential not only to prepare future physicians for everyday practice but also to foster a more positive, confident, and competent engagement with digital health innovations. Without a standardized and comprehensive approach, the potential of eHealth in improving patient care and clinical efficiency will remain underutilized.</Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Notes" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Notes</MainHeadline><SubHeadline>Funding</SubHeadline><Pgraph>This research was supported by resources provided by the Institute of Family Medicine of the University Medical Centre Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Competing interests</SubHeadline><Pgraph>JS received public funding for several eHealth projects and he is the editor of a book on eHealth and telemedicine. The other authors have no competing interests as defined by GMS, or other interests that might be perceived to influence the results and/or discussion reported in this paper.</Pgraph></TextBlock>
<References linked="yes">
<Reference refNo="1">
<RefAuthor>Tudor Car L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kyaw BM</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Nannan Panday RS</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>van der Kleij R</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Chavannes N</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Majeed A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Car J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Digital Health Training Programs for Medical Students: Scoping Review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefJournal>JMIR Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>e28275</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Tudor Car L, Kyaw BM, Nannan Panday RS, van der Kleij R, Chavannes N, Majeed A, Car J. Digital Health Training Programs for Medical Students: Scoping Review. JMIR Med Educ. 2021 Jul 21;7(3):e28275. DOI: 10.2196/28275</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.2196/28275</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="2">
<RefAuthor>Vossen K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Rethans JJ</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>van Kuijk SMJ</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>van der Vleuten CP</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kubben PL</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Understanding Medical Students' Attitudes Toward Learning eHealth: Questionnaire Study</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>JMIR Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>e17030</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Vossen K, Rethans JJ, van Kuijk SMJ, van der Vleuten CP, Kubben PL. Understanding Medical Students' Attitudes Toward Learning eHealth: Questionnaire Study. JMIR Med Educ. 2020 Oct 1;6(2):e17030. DOI: 10.2196/17030</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.2196/17030</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="3">
<RefAuthor>Echelard JF</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Méthot F</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Nguyen HA</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Pomey MP</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Medical Student Training in eHealth: Scoping Review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>JMIR Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>e20027</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Echelard JF, Méthot F, Nguyen HA, Pomey MP. Medical Student Training in eHealth: Scoping Review. JMIR Med Educ. 2020 Sep 11;6(2):e20027. DOI: 10.2196/20027</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.2196/20027</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="4">
<RefAuthor>Bundesministerium für Gesundheit</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Digitalisierung im Gesundheitswesen</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Bundesministerium für Gesundheit. Digitalisierung im Gesundheitswesen. [accessed 2025 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/themen/digitalisierung/digitalisierung-im-gesundheitswesen.html</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/themen/digitalisierung/digitalisierung-im-gesundheitswesen.html</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="5">
<RefAuthor>Kuhn S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Jungmann F</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Medizin im digitalen Zeitalter: Telemedizin in der studentischen Lehre</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2018</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Radiologe</RefJournal>
<RefPage>236-40</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Kuhn S, Jungmann F. Medizin im digitalen Zeitalter: Telemedizin in der studentischen Lehre [Medicine in the digital age: Telemedicine in medical school education]. Radiologe. 2018 Mar;58(3):236-40. DOI: 10.1007/s00117-017-0351-7</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-017-0351-7</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="6">
<RefAuthor>Waschkau A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zwierlein R</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Steinhäuser J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Barrieren und fördernde Faktoren für telemedizinische Anwendungen in der hausärztlichen Praxis – Qualitative Ergebnisse einer Pilotstudie</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2019</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Z Allg Med</RefJournal>
<RefPage>405-12</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Waschkau A, Zwierlein R, Steinhäuser J. Barrieren und fördernde Faktoren für telemedizinische Anwendungen in der hausärztlichen Praxis – Qualitative Ergebnisse einer Pilotstudie. Z Allg Med. 2019;95(10):405-12. DOI: 10.3238/zfa.2019.0405-0412</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3238/zfa.2019.0405-0412</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="7">
<RefAuthor>Wensing M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Paech B</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Roth C</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Schwill S</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Learning, understanding and the use of information technology: a survey study among primary care physician trainees</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2019</RefYear>
<RefJournal>BMC Health Serv Res</RefJournal>
<RefPage>728</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Wensing M, Paech B, Roth C, Schwill S. Learning, understanding and the use of information technology: a survey study among primary care physician trainees. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Oct 22;19(1):728. DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4615-y</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-019-4615-y</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="8">
<RefAuthor>Waschkau A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Götz K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Steinhäuser J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Fit for the Future - Entwicklung eines Seminars zu Aspekten der Digitalisierung im Gesundheitswesen als Beitrag der Lehre im Fach Medizinische Soziologie</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes</RefJournal>
<RefPage>48-53</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Waschkau A, Götz K, Steinhäuser J. Fit for the Future - Entwicklung eines Seminars zu Aspekten der Digitalisierung im Gesundheitswesen als Beitrag der Lehre im Fach Medizinische Soziologie [Fit for the Future: Development of a seminar on aspects of digitization of healthcare as a contribution of Medical Sociology]. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2020 Sep;155:48-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2020.06.006</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2020.06.006</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="9">
<RefAuthor>Waschkau A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Flägel K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Goetz K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Steinhäuser J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Evaluation of attitudes towards telemedicine as a basis for successful implementation: A cross-sectional survey among postgraduate trainees in family medicine in Germany</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes</RefJournal>
<RefPage>75-81</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Waschkau A, Flägel K, Goetz K, Steinhäuser J. Evaluation of attitudes towards telemedicine as a basis for successful implementation: A cross-sectional survey among postgraduate trainees in family medicine in Germany. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2020 Nov;156-157:75-81.
DOI: 10.1016/j.zefq.2020.07.001</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.zefq.2020.07.001</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="10">
<RefAuthor>Bundesärztekammer</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear>2019</RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>22. Deutscher Ärztetag - Beschlussprotokoll</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Bundesärztekammer. 122. Deutscher Ärztetag - Beschlussprotokoll. Bundesärztekammer; 2019. Available from: https://www.bundesaerztekammer.de/fileadmin/user_upload/_old-files/downloads/pdf-Ordner/122.DAET/Beschlussprotokoll_122_DAET_2019_Stand_20190627.pdf</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.bundesaerztekammer.de/fileadmin/user_upload/_old-files/downloads/pdf-Ordner/122.DAET/Beschlussprotokoll_122_DAET_2019_Stand_20190627.pdf</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="11">
<RefAuthor>Medizinische Fakultäten</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>LOOOP – Learning opportunities, objectives and outcomes platform</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Medizinische Fakultäten. LOOOP – Learning opportunities, objectives and outcomes platform. [accessed 2025 Jul 17]. Available from: https://nklm.de/zend/menu</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://nklm.de/zend/menu</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="12">
<RefAuthor>Justus-Liebig University Giessen - Department of Medicine</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Focus curriculum “Digital Medicine, eHealth and Telemedicine”</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Justus-Liebig University Giessen - Department of Medicine. Focus curriculum “Digital Medicine, eHealth and Telemedicine”. [accessed 2025 Jul 17]. Available from: https://www.uni-giessen.de/de/fbz/fb11/studium/medizin/klinik/spc/spcehealth</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.uni-giessen.de/de/fbz/fb11/studium/medizin/klinik/spc/spcehealth</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="13">
<RefAuthor>Universität Marburg</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Wahlfach: Medizin im digitalen Zeitalter</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Universität Marburg. Wahlfach: Medizin im digitalen Zeitalter. Available from: https://www.uni-marburg.de/de/fb20/bereiche/methoden-gesundheit/idm/studium/medizin-im-digitalen-zeitalter</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.uni-marburg.de/de/fb20/bereiche/methoden-gesundheit/idm/studium/medizin-im-digitalen-zeitalter</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="14">
<RefAuthor>Universität zu Lübeck</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Studienverlaufsplan Studiengang Humanmedizin</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Universität zu Lübeck. Studienverlaufsplan Studiengang Humanmedizin. [accessed 2025 Apr 29]. Available from: https://www.uni-luebeck.de/fileadmin/uzl_med/pdf/ueberblicken/Studienverlaufsplan_Medizin_UzL_241015.pdf</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.uni-luebeck.de/fileadmin/uzl_med/pdf/ueberblicken/Studienverlaufsplan_Medizin_UzL_241015.pdf</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="15">
<RefAuthor>Universität zu Lübeck</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Studiengang Humanmedizin - Kursbeschreibungen Klinik</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Universität zu Lübeck. Studiengang Humanmedizin - Kursbeschreibungen Klinik. [accessed 2025 May 15]. Available from: https://www.uni-luebeck.de/fileadmin/uzl_med/pdf/studierende/Klinik/250331_Kursbeschreibungen_Klinik.pdf</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.uni-luebeck.de/fileadmin/uzl_med/pdf/studierende/Klinik/250331_Kursbeschreibungen_Klinik.pdf</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="16">
<RefAuthor>Universitätsklinikum Schleswig Holstein (UKSH) - Institut für Allgemeinmedizin - Lübeck</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Seminar Allgemeinmedizin</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Universitätsklinikum Schleswig Holstein (UKSH) - Institut für Allgemeinmedizin - Lübeck. Seminar Allgemeinmedizin. [accessed 2025 May 15]. Available from: https://www.uksh.de/allgemeinmedizin-luebeck/Lehre/Seminar%2BAllgemeinmedizin.html</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.uksh.de/allgemeinmedizin-luebeck/Lehre/Seminar%2BAllgemeinmedizin.html</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="17">
<RefAuthor>Steinhäuser J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Telemedizin und eHealth</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Steinhäuser J, editor. Telemedizin und eHealth. München: Urban & Fischer/Elsevier; 2021.</RefTotal>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="18">
<RefAuthor>Institut für medizinische Informatik - Universität zu Lübeck</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Querschnittsbereich „Epidemiologie, Medizinische Biometrie und Medizinische Informatik“, Teilgebiet "Medizinische Informatik" im Studiengang „Humanmedizin“ an der Universität zu Lübeck</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Institut für medizinische Informatik - Universität zu Lübeck.Querschnittsbereich „Epidemiologie, Medizinische Biometrie und Medizinische Informatik“, Teilgebiet "Medizinische Informatik" im Studiengang „Humanmedizin“ an der Universität zu Lübeck. [accessed 2025 May 15]. Available from: https://www.imi.uni-luebeck.de/lehre/querschnittsbereich-mi-im-studiengang-humanmedizin</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.imi.uni-luebeck.de/lehre/querschnittsbereich-mi-im-studiengang-humanmedizin</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="19">
<RefAuthor>Universität zu Lübeck</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Lübeck „in Zahlen“</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Universität zu Lübeck. Lübeck „in Zahlen“.</RefTotal>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="20">
<RefAuthor>Anonym</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). [accessed 2025 Jan 14]. Available from: https://gdpr-info.eu/</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://gdpr-info.eu/</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="21">
<RefAuthor>SurveyMonkey</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Create online surveys and forms that mean business</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>SurveyMonkey. Create online surveys and forms that mean business. [Accessed 2025 Jan 14]. Available from: https://www.surveymonkey.com/</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.surveymonkey.com/</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="22">
<RefAuthor>IBM Corp</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28.0</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>IBM Corp. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 28.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp; 2021.</RefTotal>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="23">
<RefAuthor>Waschkau A</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Kapitel 7.1: Bestimmung von Bedarf und Determinanten</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Telemedizin und eHealth</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage>115-20</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Waschkau A. Kapitel 7.1: Bestimmung von Bedarf und Determinanten. In: Steinhäuser J, editor. Telemedizin und eHealth. München: Elsevier; 2021. p. 115-20.</RefTotal>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="24">
<RefAuthor>Goetz K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Grienitz K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Steinhäuser J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Factors influencing the choice of specialization - a cross-sectional study with civilian medical students and prospective medical officers in Germany</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2024</RefYear>
<RefJournal>BMC Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>1161</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Goetz K, Grienitz K, Steinhäuser J. Factors influencing the choice of specialization - a cross-sectional study with civilian medical students and prospective medical officers in Germany. BMC Med Educ. 2024 Oct 17;24(1):1161. DOI: 10.1186/s12909-024-06173-9</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06173-9</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="25">
<RefAuthor>Bajra R</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Frazier W</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Graves L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Jacobson K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Rodriguez A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Theobald M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Lin S</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Feasibility and Acceptability of a US National Telemedicine Curriculum for Medical Students and Residents: Multi-institutional Cross-sectional Study</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2023</RefYear>
<RefJournal>JMIR Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>e43190</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Bajra R, Frazier W, Graves L, Jacobson K, Rodriguez A, Theobald M, Lin S. Feasibility and Acceptability of a US National Telemedicine Curriculum for Medical Students and Residents: Multi-institutional Cross-sectional Study. JMIR Med Educ. 2023 May 8;9:e43190. DOI: 10.2196/43190</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.2196/43190</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="26">
<RefAuthor>Kuhn S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Müller N</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kirchgässner E</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ulzheimer L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Deutsch KL</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Digital skills for medical students - qualitative evaluation of the curriculum 4.0 "Medicine in the digital age"</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>GMS J Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>Doc60</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Kuhn S, Müller N, Kirchgässner E, Ulzheimer L, Deutsch KL. Digital skills for medical students - qualitative evaluation of the curriculum 4.0 "Medicine in the digital age". GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Nov 16;37(6):Doc60. DOI: 10.3205/zma001353</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001353</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="27">
<RefAuthor>Hege I</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Tolks D</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kuhn S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Shiozawa T</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Digital skills in healthcare</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>GMS J Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>Doc63</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Hege I, Tolks D, Kuhn S, Shiozawa T. Digital skills in healthcare. GMS J Med Educ. 2020 Nov 16;37(6):Doc63.
DOI: 10.3205/zma001356</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001356</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="28">
<RefAuthor>Waibel AM</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Bischoff M</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Digitale Kompetenzen im Medizinstudium: Ergebnisse einer interdisziplinären Lehrveranstaltung</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2024</RefYear>
<RefJournal>HNO</RefJournal>
<RefPage>161-5</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Waibel AM, Bischoff M. Digitale Kompetenzen im Medizinstudium: Ergebnisse einer interdisziplinären Lehrveranstaltung [Digital competencies in medical studies: results of an interdisciplinary course]. HNO. 2024 Mar;72(3):161-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00106-023-01411-w</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1007/s00106-023-01411-w</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="29">
<RefAuthor>Rammstedt B</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Rammsayer TH</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Gender differences in self-estimated intelligence and their relation to gender-role orientation</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2002</RefYear>
<RefJournal>European Journal of Personality</RefJournal>
<RefPage>369-82</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Rammstedt B, Rammsayer TH. Gender differences in self-estimated intelligence and their relation to gender-role orientation. European Journal of Personality. 2002;16(5):369-82. DOI: 10.1002/per.454 </RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1002/per.454</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="30">
<RefAuthor>Exley CL</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kessler JB</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Taylor CA</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>The Gender Gap in Self-Promotion. National Bureau of Economic Research</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2019</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Working Paper Series</RefJournal>
<RefPage>26345</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Exley CL, Kessler JB, Taylor CA. The Gender Gap in Self-Promotion. National Bureau of Economic Research. Working Paper Series. 2019;26345.</RefTotal>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="31">
<RefAuthor>Blanch-Hartigan D</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Medical students' self-assessment of performance: results from three meta-analyses</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2011</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Patient Educ Couns</RefJournal>
<RefPage>3-9</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Blanch-Hartigan D. Medical students' self-assessment of performance: results from three meta-analyses. Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Jul;84(1):3-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.037</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2010.06.037</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="32">
<RefAuthor>Aulenkamp J</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Mikuteit M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Löffler T</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Schmidt J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Overview of digital health teaching courses in medical education in Germany in 2020</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefJournal>GMS J Med Educ</RefJournal>
<RefPage>Doc80</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Aulenkamp J, Mikuteit M, Löffler T, Schmidt J. Overview of digital health teaching courses in medical education in Germany in 2020. GMS J Med Educ. 2021 Apr 15;38(4):Doc80.
DOI: 10.3205/zma001476</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3205/zma001476</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="33">
<RefAuthor>Deutsches Ärzteblatt</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Issue 14/2018</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Deutsches Ärzteblatt. Issue 14/2018. [Accessed 2025 May 12]. Available from: https://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/titel/dae/2018/14</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.aerzteblatt.de/archiv/titel/dae/2018/14</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="34">
<RefAuthor>Universitätsmedizin Mainz</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear>2017</RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Universitätsmedizin Mainz erweitert digitales Lehrangebot als Curriculum 4.0</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Universitätsmedizin Mainz. Universitätsmedizin Mainz erweitert digitales Lehrangebot als Curriculum 4.0. 2017 Jun 02 [accessed 2025 May 12]. Available from: https://presse.uni-mainz.de/universitaetsmedizin-mainz-erweitert-digitales-lehrangebot-als-curriculum-4-0/</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://presse.uni-mainz.de/universitaetsmedizin-mainz-erweitert-digitales-lehrangebot-als-curriculum-4-0/</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="35">
<RefAuthor>Klauer KJ</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Leutner D</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Lerntheorien und Lernstrategien für Studierende</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>Klauer KJ, Leutner D. Lerntheorien und Lernstrategien für Studierende. [accessed 2025 May 12]. Available from: https://www.fh-zwickau.de/hochschule/service/hochschuldidaktik/werkzeugkasten-hochschullehre/lerntechniken/uebersicht/</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.fh-zwickau.de/hochschule/service/hochschuldidaktik/werkzeugkasten-hochschullehre/lerntechniken/uebersicht/</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="36">
<RefAuthor>AMBOSS</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle></RefTitle>
<RefYear></RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Campus license for Lübeck</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage></RefPage>
<RefTotal>AMBOSS. Campus license for Lübeck. [accessed 2025 Apr 29]. Available from: https://www.amboss.com/de/campuslizenz/luebeck</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://www.amboss.com/de/campuslizenz/luebeck</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="37">
<RefAuthor>Bosnjak M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Batinic B</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Understanding the Intention to Participate in Online-Surveys</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2002</RefYear>
<RefBookTitle>Online Social Sciences</RefBookTitle>
<RefPage>81-92</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Bosnjak M, Batinic B. Understanding the Intention to Participate in Online-Surveys. In: Batinic B, Reips UD, Bosnjak M, editors. Online Social Sciences. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber; 2002. p. 81-92.</RefTotal>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="38">
<RefAuthor>Meterko M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Restuccia JD</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Stolzmann K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Mohr D</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Brennan C</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Glasgow J</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kaboli P</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Response rates, nonresponse bias and data quality: Results from a National Survey of Senior Healthcare Leaders</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2015</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Public Opinion Quarterly</RefJournal>
<RefPage>130-44</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Meterko M, Restuccia JD, Stolzmann K, Mohr D, Brennan C, Glasgow J, Kaboli P. Response rates, nonresponse bias and data quality: Results from a National Survey of Senior Healthcare Leaders. Public Opinion Quarterly. 2015 Spring;79(1):130-44. DOI: 10.1093/poq/nfu052</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfu052</RefLink>
</Reference>
</References>
<Media>
<Tables>
<Table format="png">
<MediaNo>1</MediaNo>
<MediaID>1</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Table 1: Sociodemographic of the participants</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Table>
<Table format="png">
<MediaNo>2</MediaNo>
<MediaID>2</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Table 2: Attitudes and knowledge about eHealth</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Table>
<Table format="png">
<MediaNo>3</MediaNo>
<MediaID>3</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Table 3: User behavior and academic content about eHealth</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Table>
<Table format="png">
<MediaNo>4</MediaNo>
<MediaID>4</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Table 4: Attitude and knowledge concerning the availability of eHealth content in the curriculum (yes vs. no): a group comparison using Mann-Whitney-U test</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Table>
<Table format="png">
<MediaNo>5</MediaNo>
<MediaID>5</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Table 5: Comparison of the subgroups by gender (male vs female) using Mann-Whitney-U test</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Table>
<NoOfTables>5</NoOfTables>
</Tables>
<Figures>
<NoOfPictures>0</NoOfPictures>
</Figures>
<InlineFigures>
<NoOfPictures>0</NoOfPictures>
</InlineFigures>
<Attachments>
<Attachment>
<MediaNo>1</MediaNo>
<MediaID mimeType="application/pdf" size="179772" filename="000355.a1.pdf" url="" origFilename="000355_Attachment1.pdf">1</MediaID>
<AttachmentTitle>Questionnaire</AttachmentTitle>
</Attachment>
<NoOfAttachments>1</NoOfAttachments>
</Attachments>
</Media>
</OrigData>
</GmsArticle>]]></plaintext></textgroup></pgraph></abstract></origdata></gmsarticle>