Paper-based or electronic portfolios? A study on undergraduate medical students

Background: A Portfolio is an excellent instrument for integrating instruction and evaluation in education. In most instances, the portfolios employed are paper-based, which presents several drawbacks. This study compares the effectiveness of paper-based and electronic portfolios at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. Methods: This interventional study was conducted with two parallel groups in the Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. The intervention group used an electronic portfolio for one month while the control group completed the usual paper-based portfolio. The satisfaction and final grades of medical students were compared alongside qualitative comments for the strengths and weaknesses of portfolios. Results: Most basic characteristics were similar in the two study groups except grade point average (GPA). The final grade was 16.43±1.55 in the control group, while it was 17.31±0.94 in the intervention group (P=0.053). The satisfaction scores were not different between the two groups (10.08±4.44 in the control group and 10.93±4.68 in the intervention group, P=0.568). The linear regression model showed no difference between the two groups after adjusting for GPA. Conclusion: The results indicate that although there are no substantial differences in student satisfaction or final grade between the two portfolio types, this study affirms the potential advantages of electronic portfolios and asserts that, due to the varied impacts of technology on learning experiences, the implementation of these tools necessitates consideration of the specific needs and challenges faced by students.