Open Access Peer-reviewed Research Article

Interactive presentation digital tool Mentimeter perceived as accessible and beneficial for exam preparation by medical students

Main Article Content

Victoria C. Kuritza
Daniel P. Cibich
Kashif A. Ahmad corresponding author


As medical students are responsible for understanding vast medical content in a short amount of time, instructors have shifted their focus to include flipped classroom model and use innovative educational tools in class to facilitate stronger comprehension and critical thinking. While there are many audience response systems (ARS) available, the cost to the institution and students in the form of licenses, and installation of hardware can be a significant problem. Besides, faculty can show resistance in adopting these tools. Mentimeter is a web-based ARS that is low cost and is available on any device anytime. We wanted to inquire about its impact on learning in our medical students since course evaluations are usually retrievable at the end of course. By analyzing satisfaction surveys, this study looked at the utilization of Mentimeter in a medical physiology course. Medical students overwhelmingly agreed that Mentimeter is a useful tool for exam preparation in clarifying difficult concepts and appreciated an instructor-led readiness assessment several days before their first exam. We believe that the use of this application can help explain basic concepts, make office hours more constructive, and bring a paradigm shift in readiness assessment for medical students in both preclinical and clinical curriculum.

Mentimeter, flipped classroom, Audience Response System, student engagement, physiology, readiness assessment

Article Details

How to Cite
Kuritza, V., Cibich, D., & Ahmad, K. A. (2020). Interactive presentation digital tool Mentimeter perceived as accessible and beneficial for exam preparation by medical students. Advances in Educational Research and Evaluation, 1(2), 63-67.


  1. Beatty ID. Transforming student learning with classroom communication systems. Educause Center for Applied Research, 2004, 3: 1-13.
  2. Dufresne RJ, Gerace WJ, Leonard WJ, et al. Classtalk: A Classroom Communication System for Active Learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 1996, 7(2): 3- 47.
  3. Ding L, Reay NW, Lee A, et al. Are we asking the right questions? Validating clicker question sequences through student interviews. American Journal of Physics, 2009, 77(7): 643-650.
  4. Miller RG, Ashar B and Getz KJ. Evaluation of an audience response system for the continuing education of health professionals. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 2003, 23(2): 109-115.
  5. Uhari M, Renko M and Soini H. Experiences of using an interactive audience response system in lectures. Biomed Central Medical Education, 2003, 3(1): 12.
  6. Tremblay E. Educating the Mobile Generation - using personal cell phones as audience response systems in postsecondary science teaching. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 2010, 29(2): 217-227.
  7. Reimers S and Stewart N. Using SMS text messaging for teaching and data collection in the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 2009, 41(3): 675-681.
  8. Graham CR, Tripp TR, Seawright L, et al. Empowering or compelling reluctant participators using audience response systems. Active Learning in Higher Education, 2007, 8(3): 233-258.
  9. Norman G. Medical education: past, present and future. Perspectives on Medical Education, 2012, 1(1): 6-14.
  10. Skochelak SE. A Decade of Reports Calling for Change in Medical Education: What Do They Say? Academic Medicine, 2010, 85(9): 26-33.
  11. Crosson FJ, Leu J, Roemer BM, et al. Gaps In Residency Training Should Be Addressed To Better Prepare Doctors For A Twenty-First-Century Delivery System. Health Affairs, 2011, 30(11): 2142-2148.
  12. Ahmad K and Hinck G. The Impact of a Course-Content Creation Tool (EducreationsTM) on Student Learning in a Physiology Course. Medical Science Educator, 2016, 26(3): 275-277.
  13. Castillo-Manzano JI, Castro-Nuo M, Lpez-Valpuesta L et al. Measuring the effect of ARS on academic performance: A global meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 2016, 96: 109-121.
  14. Wenk L. Technology-Assisted Active Learning In Large Lectures, A. P. McNeal and C. D’Avanzo, eds., Student- Active Science: Models of Innovation in College Science Teaching. Philadelphia: Saunders College Publishing, 1997: 431-451.
  15. Adham ZO, Grenda PJ and Ahmad KA. Developing a digital algorithm for cognitive apprenticeship in first year medical school physiology. Medical Science Educator, 2018, 28: 119-124.
  16. Mazur E. Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual, Upper Saddle River, N.J: Prentice Hall, 1997.