How past European Board of Ophthalmology (EBO) candidates acquired theoretical knowledge: an EBO survey

BACKGROUND: The European Board of Ophthalmology (EBO), whose mission is to guarantee high standards of care in ophthalmology, has assessed residency training quality for over 30 years through the EBO Diploma (EBOD) examination, undertaken by residents and certified ophthalmologists from the 27 European Union member states as well as Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Türkiye. Preparation for the EBOD is largely self-directed, conducted alongside demanding clinical duties, and relies mainly on asynchronous learning. This study aimed to analyse trends in the use of learning tools among European residents and ophthalmologists preparing for the EBOD and factors associated with their choice of study resources. METHODS: A 27-item online survey was distributed to past (2016 to 2024) EBOD candidates. Data collected included demographics, study habits, learning resources, meeting attendance, and financial support. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to analyse associations between use of learning tools and gender, examination year, clinical workload, study time, English proficiency, and country of training. RESULTS: A total of 633 responses (response rate, 10%) from 31 countries were analysed. Book use was high (92%) and stable over time. Respondents who sat the examination before 2020 were more likely to read journal articles (p < 0.0001, OR 2.47, 95%CI 1.56-3.92) and less likely to use social media (p = 0.002, OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.41-0.82), websites (p = 0.018, OR 0.51, 95%CI 0.29-0.88), and smartphone applications (p = 0.019, OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.47-0.94). Candidates reporting fewer than the median of study hours were less likely to read journal articles (p = 0.0002, OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.34-0.72). Candidates receiving financial support attended international meetings more frequently than those without support (p < 0.0001). Differences in digital tool use and funding sources were observed among the five most represented countries (France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and Türkiye). CONCLUSIONS: EBOD candidates demonstrate increasing engagement with digital learning tools. Associations between learning resource use, examination year, study time, and country of training highlight the need for adaptable educational strategies reflecting evolving technologies and diverse learner profiles.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Medical Education
Published
2026-07-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-026-09913-1
Primary Topic
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How past European Board of Ophthalmology (EBO) candidates acquired theoretical knowledge: an EBO survey

Juris Vanags, Léa Dormegny, Wagih Aclimandos, Francis Carbonaro et al.
BMC Medical Education
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
article

How past European Board of Ophthalmology (EBO) candidates acquired theoretical knowledge: an EBO survey

Juris Vanags, Léa Dormegny, Wagih Aclimandos, Francis Carbonaro, Helena Prior Filipe, Christian Pruente, Tristan Bourcier, Lauriana Solecki, Emilia Koestel, Raoul Kanav Khanna, Barbara Cvenkel, Marcin Stopa, Sorcha Ní Dhubhghaill, Rémi Yaïci, Tero Kivelä, Hüban Atilla, Rafael Martinez Costa, Renata Iveković, Brendan Strong, Jérémie Poirot, Rimvydas Asoklis, Lisa Flanagan, Anna Maino, Justine Opala, Catherine Creuzot-Garcher, Siegfried Priglinger, Ewa Mrukwa-Kominek
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The European Board of Ophthalmology (EBO), whose mission is to guarantee high standards of care in ophthalmology, has assessed residency training quality for over 30 years through the EBO Diploma (EBOD) examination, undertaken by residents and certified ophthalmologists from the 27 European Union member states as well as Norway, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Türkiye. Preparation for the EBOD is largely self-directed, conducted alongside demanding clinical duties, and relies mainly on asynchronous learning. This study aimed to analyse trends in the use of learning tools among European residents and ophthalmologists preparing for the EBOD and factors associated with their choice of study resources. METHODS: A 27-item online survey was distributed to past (2016 to 2024) EBOD candidates. Data collected included demographics, study habits, learning resources, meeting attendance, and financial support. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to analyse associations between use of learning tools and gender, examination year, clinical workload, study time, English proficiency, and country of training. RESULTS: A total of 633 responses (response rate, 10%) from 31 countries were analysed. Book use was high (92%) and stable over time. Respondents who sat the examination before 2020 were more likely to read journal articles (p < 0.0001, OR 2.47, 95%CI 1.56-3.92) and less likely to use social media (p = 0.002, OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.41-0.82), websites (p = 0.018, OR 0.51, 95%CI 0.29-0.88), and smartphone applications (p = 0.019, OR 0.55, 95%CI 0.47-0.94). Candidates reporting fewer than the median of study hours were less likely to read journal articles (p = 0.0002, OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.34-0.72). Candidates receiving financial support attended international meetings more frequently than those without support (p < 0.0001). Differences in digital tool use and funding sources were observed among the five most represented countries (France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and Türkiye). CONCLUSIONS: EBOD candidates demonstrate increasing engagement with digital learning tools. Associations between learning resource use, examination year, study time, and country of training highlight the need for adaptable educational strategies reflecting evolving technologies and diverse learner profiles.

BMC Medical Education
Université de Tours (FR), Poznan University of Medical Sciences (PL), Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE), University Hospital Centre Zagreb (HR), Ankara University (TR), Inserm (FR), Universitat de València (ES), Medical University of Silesia (PL), Vilnius University (LT), Université de Bourgogne (FR), University of Zagreb (HR), University of Basel (CH), Royal Dublin Society (IE), Helsinki University Hospital (FI), Mater Dei Hospital (MT), Ljubljana University Medical Centre (SI), Manchester Royal Eye Hospital (GB), LMU Klinikum (DE), Hospital Universitari i Politècnic La Fe (ES), Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Tours (FR), Pauls Stradiņš Clinical University Hospital (LV), Hôpital Bretonneau (FR), Hospital de Egas Moniz (PT), Sisters of Charity Hospital (HR), Neues Museum Biel (CH), Maison des Sciences sociales et des Humanités de Dijon (FR), King's College Hospital (GB), Université de Strasbourg (FR), MRC Mitochondrial Biology Unit (GB), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE), National Patient Safety Foundation (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Intraocular Surgery and Lenses
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.