Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Midwifery, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

2 Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

3 Department of Midwifery, Student Research Committee, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Science, Ahvaz, Iran


BACKGROUND: E‑learning is web‑based learning for education and training. The current global
pandemic crisis created due to COVID‑19 has made worldwide online learning. This study aimed to
investigate the level of satisfaction and quality of E‑learning in medical universities from the students’
point of view during the epidemic of COVID‑19 and assessing the obstacles and solutions proposed
to improve the quality of E‑learning.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross‑sectional, web‑based study was conducted among 400
medical university students of Iran during the epidemic of COVID‑19. After getting written consent,
three parts questionnaire contains demographic, user satisfaction, quality questionnaire, and three
open‑ended questions were distributed randomly using social media. Descriptive analysis, t‑test,
Chi‑square, and Pearson correlation coefficient were used to achieve the objective of this study, with
significance set to P < 0.05. Furthermore, three open‑ended questions were reviewed qualitatively
and the problems and solutions suggested by the students were reported.
RESULTS: Based on the findings of the descriptive section, 277 of the respondents were girls (69%)
with a mean age of 21 ± 2 years. Sixty‑nine percent of students were studying in medical sciences
universities and 31% were studying in Islamic Azad University. The level of satisfaction was in the
upper range of low (34.0 ± 10.0); P < 0.001, and intention to reuse was moderate (23.06 ± 6.0);
P = 0.064. Student’s perception of quality in most domains was in the upper range of low to medium.
User satisfaction, intention to reuse, the quality of knowledge, and participatory quality for evaluating
online courses were significantly higher in the Azad University group than in medical universities.
CONCLUSION: Given that this is the first experience in the use of E‑learning in Iran, both universities
have not yet fully succeeded in satisfying students and it is necessary to increase the quality of
E‑learning based on student suggestions.


  1. Ruiz JG, Mintzer MJ, Leipzig RM. The impact of E‑learning in
    medical education. Acad Med 2006; 81:207‑12.
    2. Cidral WA, Oliveira T, Di Felice M, Aparicio M. E‑learning success
    determinants: Brazilian empirical study. Comput Educ 2018;
    3. Al‑Samarraie H, Teng BK, Alzahrani AI, Alalwan N. E‑learning
    continuance satisfaction in higher education: A unified
    perspective from instructors and students. Stud High Educ 2017;
    4. Jefferson R, Arnold L. Effects of virtual education on academic
    culture: Perceived advantages and disadvantages. China Educ
    Rev. 2009;6:61‑66.
    5. Mirjana RM. Advantages and disadvantages of e‑learning in
    comparison to traditional form of learning. Ann Univ Petroşani
    Econ 2010; 10:289‑98.
    6. Srivastava DP. Advantages and disadvantages of E‑education
    and E‑learning. J Retail Market Distrib Manage 2019; 2:22‑7.
    7. Qurbankhani MS. Representing the challenges of virtual education
    in the iranian higher education system: A phenomenological
    study. Inform Commun Technol Educ Sci 2017; 7:26.
    8. Childs S, Blenkinsopp E, Hall A, Walton G. Effective e‐learning for
    health professionals and students – barriers and their solutions.
    A systematic review of the literature – findings from the HeXL
    project. Health Inform Lib J 2005; 22:20‑32.
    9. Thiele JE. Learning patterns of online students. J Nurs Educ 2003;
    10. Ke F, Kwak D. Constructs of student‑centered online learning on
    learning satisfaction of a diverse online student body: A structural
    equation modeling approach. J Educ Comput Res 2013; 48:97‑122.
    11. Kuo YC, Walker AE, Belland BR, Schroder KE. A predictive study
    of student satisfaction in online education programs. Int Rev Res
    Open Distribut Learn 2013; 14:16‑39.
    12. Saxena K. Coronavirus Accelerates Pace of Digital Education in
    India; 2020. Available from:‑learning
    ia. [Last accessed on 2020 Dec 01].
    13. NAVID Learning Management System. Tehran University of
    Medical Sciences. Available from:
    AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1. [Last accessed on 2020 Mar 25].
    14. Lee JW. Online support service quality, online learning acceptance,
    and student satisfaction. Internet High Educ 2010; 13:277‑83.
    15. Oliver RL. A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences
    of satisfaction decisions. J Mark Res 1980; 17:460‑9.
    16. Chiu CM, Hsu MH, Sun SY, Lin TC, Sun PC. Usablity, quality,
    value and e‑learning continuance decisions. Comput Educ
    17. Scotland NEf. “NHS Shared Learning Quality Assurance
    Checklists for Evaluating Learning Objects and Online Courses”:
    NHS Education for Scotland; 2009. Available from: https://www.
    checklists.pdf. [Last accessed on 2020 May 22].
    18. CDC. “Quality E‑Learning Checklist Quality E‑learning
    Checklist,”: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2018; 1‑2.
    Available from:
    pdfs/design/elearning‑checklist‑508.pdf. [Last accessed on 2020
    May 22].
    19. Puška A, Ejubović A. Quality enhancement through determining
    the gap between the expectations and perceptions of students:
    Empirica college case study. Proceedings of the Faculty of
    Economics in East Sarajevo, 1 (12):23‑36.
    20. Puška A, Puška E, Dragić L, Maksimović A, Osmanović N.
    Students’ satisfaction with E‑learning platforms in Bosnia and
    Herzegovina. Technol Knowl Learn 2021; 26 (3): 173–191. [doi:
    21. Darmawan F. Pengukuran tingkat kepuasan pemanfaatan
    E‑learning (studi kasus E‑learning IF UNPAS). J Speed 2015;
    22. Satria Wijaya IG, Kayun Suwastika IW. Analisis Kepuasan
    Pengguna Elearning Menggunakan Metode End-User Computing
    Satisfaction. E‑Proceedings KNS and I STIKOM Bali; 2017;558‑562.
    ISSN 2460‑8378. Available at: <https://knsi.stikom‑
    index.php/eproceedings/article/view/102>. [Last accessed on
    2020 May 22].
    23. Hammouri Q, Abu‑Shanab E. Exploring factors affecting users’
  2. satisfaction toward e‑learning systems. Int J Inform Commun
    Technol Educ 2018; 14:44‑57.
    24. Fichten CS, Ferraro V, Asuncion JV, Chwojka C, Barile M,
    Nguyen MN, et al. Disabilities and e‑learning problems and
    solutions: An exploratory study. J Educ Technol Soc 2009; 12:241‑56.
    25. Mortazavi F, Salehabadi R, Sharifzadeh M, Ghardashi F. Students
    and #39; perspectives on the virtual teaching challenges in the
    COVID‑19 pandemic: A qualitative study. J Educ Health Promot
    2021; 10:59.
    26. Narain T, Mittal A, Singh V, Panwar V. Feasibility and usefulness
    of online virtual training of urology residents in times of
    COVID‑19: A single‑center experience and an evidence‑based
    strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat analysis. J Educ
    Health Promot 2021; 10:116.