Effective Online Education: Pharmacists’ Perspective

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Online education has become an increasingly important mode of learning for healthcare professionals, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. In Malaysia, pharmacists frequently engage in online continuing education; however, limited evidence exists on how they perceive its effectiveness, relevance, and practicality. Understanding pharmacists’ experiences is essential for improving the delivery and design of future online programmes. Objective: This study aimed to explore pharmacists’ perceptions and experiences of online education in Negeri Sembilan, focusing on identifying factors that support learning, challenges encountered, and the perceived applicability of online content to professional practice.Methods: A qualitative descriptive study was conducted among pharmacists from government and private sectors who had experience with online learning. Participants were selected through purposive sampling, and semi-structured interviews were conducted via online platforms. Data collection continued until saturation was reached. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using thematic methods supported by Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modelling to identify key themes. Results: A total of 25 pharmacists participated. Most respondents preferred synchronous learning formats, particularly webinars and video conferencing, citing structured delivery and real-time interaction as major strengths. LDA modelling revealed three core themes: comprehension, accessibility, and applicability. Comprehension reflected the importance of clear, well-organised content for effective learning; accessibility highlighted the convenience of online education alongside challenges such as unstable internet connections and limited time; applicability emphasised the need for content that aligns with clinical practice. Participants generally perceived online learning as beneficial, although issues related to focus, interaction, and practical relevance were frequently noted. Conclusion: Pharmacists in Negeri Sembilan view online education as a valuable and increasingly essential tool for continuing professional development. Strengthening content quality, improving interactivity, and addressing accessibility barriers can enhance learning outcomes and ensure greater relevance to clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION

Online education, also known as e-learning, refers to learning that utilizes electronic technologies to access educational curricula outside traditional classrooms [1]. This includes online continuing professional development (CPD), online continuing medical education (CME), web-based tutorials, online discussion groups, video conferencing via the Internet, and web seminars [2]. Amid the Covid-19 pandemic, the popularity of online education has increased exponentially [3]. 

The Department of Statistics Malaysia reported that the percentage of households with internet access increased from 85.7% in 2017 to 90.1% in 2019. In Negeri Sembilan specifically, 90.8% of residents have access to the Internet. For learning purposes, 39.9% of individuals used the internet to consult websites or to refer to online encyclopedias, while 8.1% utilized it for formal online courses and 9.5% for informal online courses [4].

Continuing education is a recommended approach for lifelong learning among professionals [5]. For pharmacists in Malaysia, continuing professional development (CPD) is a mandatory requirement for registration. An annual retention certificate requires pharmacists to obtain a minimum of 40 CPD points annually [6].

Pre-pandemic, CPD points were rarely obtained through online CME (A8), as it only contributes 1 point per article or session. However, during the pandemic, online CME is the most preferred course and the primary resource for accumulating CPD points due to its feasibility [6].

Numerous studies have been conducted in recent years regarding online education among healthcare professionals. The literature investigating the strengths, weaknesses, perceptions, challenges, and efficacy of online education among healthcare professionals (HCP) is extensive [7][8][9]. However, given the recent popularity of online education among HCPs, the lack of studies investigating its effectiveness is concerning. Therefore, this study aims to explore perspectives on effective online education among pharmacists in Negeri Sembilan.

Several studies have explored the use of online learning among healthcare professionals, particularly pharmacists. A study by Nesterowicz K et al. in 2014 revealed that more than 80% of pharmacists participated in online learning, many of them were from remote areas [10]. Sacre et al. in 2019 found that factors positively influencing online learning participation included high motivation and general confidence in computer use [5].

A systemic review by Salter et al. indicated that online learning can improve the knowledge and confidence of learners. Additionally, it stimulates interest and promotes the direct application of knowledge or skills gained into practice [11].

Moreover, Farell et al. demonstrated that the relevance of the content included in a programme affects participant engagement. Learners may lose interest in further participation if they find the content too difficult to learn and apply to their practice. Other identified barriers included technological challenges, issues with group work, and lack of time [12]. A local study by Feng et al. revealed that participants believed that using online resources saves costs, is up-to-date, enjoyable, and helps with work-life balance [13]. Recently, Shawaqfeh observed that the majority of students have high acceptance of utilizing online platforms for learning, as they possess good basic computer skills and are familiar with the software used for online courses [14].

Marriot et al. found out that the use of online materials is a flexible approach to delivering educational content among Australian community pharmacists. However, she added that a lack of confidence in using technology might affect their participation in online learning [15]. Similar findings were reported by Alkhateeb et al., where half of the participants preferred online courses due to theirs flexibility and the absence of travel requirements [16]. Zubala et al. reported that participation in e-learning benefits participants by providing new ideas and insights and improving teamwork among them during practice [17].

Most recently, in 2021, Syed et al. claimed that online learning reduces travel time while maintaining social distancing without compromising learning [3].

This study aims to explore the perspectives on effective online education among pharmacists in Negeri Sembilan, to determine the factors that encourage effective online education, and to identify the barriers to achieving effective online education.

METHOD

A qualitative approach was used to explore the effectiveness of online education among pharmacists. Purposive sampling was applied to identify participants based on the following inclusion and exclusion criteria.  

Inclusion criteria:

• Pharmacists from government sectors (hospitals, administrative offices, health clinics) and private sectors (community settings) in Negeri Sembilan.
• Pharmacists who have experienced online education during their service.

Exclusion criteria:

• Pharmacists who are unable to communicate in either English or Bahasa Malaysia.
• Pharmacists who are not familiar with Zoom, Skype, or Google Meet for the interview session.

The selection process for candidates and interviews continued until data saturation was reached, which is defined as the point at which no new codes or themes emerged and responses became repetitive. The study duration was from May 2021 to April 2022, with data collection occurring from Nov 2021 to Feb 2022.

A semi-structured interview guide was adapted from a previous study [18]. Interview questions queried participants about their views on:

1. The perceived effectiveness of online education compared to face-to-face education.
2. The facilitators and barriers to effective online education.

The guide was piloted with two participants and subsequently modified to improve the clarity, number, and length of the questions. Preliminary data indicates that the interview questions were sufficient and appropriately phrased to address the study’s objective while minimizing validity threats. Data collection concluded after interviewing 25 participants due to data saturation.

All interviewees were briefed about the study before the interviews and debriefed at the end of each session. Interviews were conducted online via Skype, Zoom, Google Meet, and other platforms at participants’ convenience. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim by two researchers fluent in both English and Malay. The duration of each interview varied between 20 and 30 minutes.

Both researchers transcribed the interviews, translated conversation from Malay to English, and checked all transcriptions against the original voice recordings. Transcripts were cross-checked by two additional authors. Any discrepancies were discussed, and a final decision was made by mutual agreement.

Responses were then tabulated based on the interview questions in a CSV (comma separated values) file for analysis. Descriptive analysis was applied to provide an overview of the online learning experiences among respondents, while the Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic modelling technique was used to explore meaningful themes in their responses. Details are presented in Table Ⅰ.

RESULT

Data pre-processing

Data pre-processing was carried out prior to topic modelling to optimize the outcome. Responses to each question were tokenized using the Python Gensim library. All words were converted to lowercase, and stop words, numbers, punctuations, special characters, and words within brackets were excluded.

Bi-grams and trigrams were formed. Tokens were then lemmatized using the Spacy ‘en-core-web-sm’ model. Only nouns and verbs were selected to create a dictionary and corpus using the Gensim library for text mining. Next, NLTK was used to remove extremely common words (those occuring in 80% of the documents) and extremely uncommon terms (those occurring in fewer than 3 documents) from the dictionary.

The final models selected for the strengths and weaknesses datasets achieved coherence scores of 0.45 and 0.43, respectively, indicating moderately coherent topic structures

Table I. Distribution of Analysis Methods.

Question	Analysis Type
Q1. What are examples of online learning platforms?	Descriptive
Q2. What is an example of the type of online learning session that you attended?	Descriptive
Q3. What do you think of online learning in the pharmacy profession?	LDA
Q4. Can you describe your satisfaction level with online pharmacy-related programs that you have attended before?	Descriptive
Q5. How would you describe the strengths of online learning in your profession?	LDA
Q6. How would you describe the weaknesses of online learning in your profession?	LDA
Q7. How has your past experience with pharmacy-related online learning affected your participation in the future?	LDA
Q8. What do you do if there are topics from the online pharmacy courses that you do not understand?	Descriptive
Q9. What do you think of the relevant of the content delivered through online courses to your pharmacy practice?	Descriptive
Q10. What do you think of learning new clinical knowledges through online learning?	LDA
Q11. How motivated are you to use the new knowledge that you have learned in your daily practice as a pharmacist?	LDA
Q12. Are there any obstacles preventing you from using your new knowledge efficiently for your professional development?	LDA
Q13. Please describe the impact of online education on your work as a pharmacist. For example, is it effective, or will it help you improve in your profession.	LDA

Table Ⅱ. Demographic Details.

Variable	Category	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Age (years)	25-30	9	36
	31-34	11	44
	35-40	5	20
Gender	Male	9	36
	Female	16	64
Race	Malay	13	52
	Chinese	10	40
	Indian	2	8
Sector	Government	18	72
	Private	7	28
Working experience (years)	<5	4	16
	5-10	16	64
	>10	5	20

suitable for interpretation. For each model, the top ten keywords were extracted to label and define the emergent themes. Themes were assigned based on dominant keywords and the conceptual patterns they represented. The distribution of responses across topics was used to understand the relative emphasis placed on different aspects of online learning by participants.

Figure Ⅰ. Platforms Used by Participants for Online Education.

Table II presents the demographic characteristics of the participants. Overall, the sample mainly comprised mid-career, government-sector, female healthcare professionals, reflecting the typical composition of the workforce in many healthcare settings.

Figure II shows that participants most preferred webinars (42%), followed by video conferencing (29%), indicating a clear preference for synchronous, real-time learning formats. Web-based tutorials (15%) were used less frequently, while online discussion forums (8%) and virtual meetings (6%) were the least preferred. Overall, participants showed a stronger preference for structured, interactive online learning modalities.

Figure III shows that most participants reported moderate satisfaction with the online learning experience (n = 18), indicating that the majority found the platforms generally acceptable. A smaller group expressed high satisfaction (n = 4), suggesting that some participants had very positive experiences with the online format. Meanwhile, three participants (n = 3) reported dissatisfaction, reflecting a minority who may have faced challenges with engagement, usability, or technical issues. Overall, the findings show that satisfaction levels leaned largely toward the middle range, with only limited reports of very positive or negative experiences.

Figure Ⅱ. Types of Online Education.

Figure Ⅲ. Satisfaction Level with Online Learning.

Figure IV illustrates the methods used by participants to make queries. The majority relied on the chatbox (n = 14), making it the most frequently used method. This was followed by email (n = 6) and consulting a colleague (n = 4). Overall, these findings indicate a clear preference for immediate, system-supported query tools over more independent or passive approaches.

Figure V presents participants’ perceptions of the relevance of online education to their professional practice. More than half (56%) indicated that online education was relevant, suggesting a strong perceived applicability of the learning content to real-world work settings. A smaller proportion (12%) felt that online education was not relevant to their practice. Overall, the majority view online education as beneficial, though a notable portion recognise its value as context-specific.

Latent Dirichlet Allocation Modelling

The LDA modelling, as shown in Table III produced a coherence score of 0.43, indicating moderately well-defined themes. Two topics emerged from the analysis. Topic 1 (“Comprehension”) contained keywords such as “learn,” “understand,” and “knowledge,” suggesting that many responses centred on clarity of content and the learning process. Topic 2 (“Accessibility”) included terms like “time,” “platform,” and “attend,” reflecting practical considerations related to convenience and ease of accessing online learning. Overall, the topics indicate that participants’ comments were primarily focused on both understanding the material and the accessibility of the learning format. DA topic modelling of participants’ comments on the strengths of online learning, as shown in Table IV (coherence = 0.45) produced two themes. The first theme, “Comprehension,” included keywords such as “attend,” “learn,” and “time,” indicating that participants valued the flexibility and enhanced understanding afforded by online learning. The second theme, “Accessibility,” was characterized by words such as “save,” “cost,” and “travel,” reflecting the perceived convenience, reduced expenses, and ease of participation.

Regarding the weaknesses of online learning, as shown in Table V (coherence = 0.43), LDA identified two themes. The first, “Accessibility Barriers,” included terms such as “internet,” “problem,” and “connection,” highlighting common technological and connectivity challenges. The second, “Comprehension Challenges,” reflected difficulties with engagement and interaction, with keywords such as “question,” “focus,” and “attend.” These results indicate that participants’ experiences with online learning were shaped primarily by both cognitive clarity and the reliability of online access.

Table VI shows that most participants felt their past online learning experiences positively influenced their likelihood of engaging in similar activities in the future. A smaller proportion reported no impact, indicating that their decision to participate again was unaffected by previous experience. Only a few respondents indicated a negative influence, suggesting that certain challenges or unsatisfactory experiences reduced their motivation to re-engage. Overall, the results suggest that prior exposure to online learning generally encourages continued participation.

LDA modelling (coherence = 0.43) identified two dominant themes in participants’ views on learning new clinical knowledge online (Table VII). The “Comprehension” theme, reflected by keywords such as “need,” “information,” “problem,” and “course,” indicated that participants emphasized the importance of clear, structured content delivery to support understanding of new material. The “Accessibility” theme, with keywords such as “face,” “get,” “session,” “time,” and “experience,” highlighted practical factors influencing learning, including ease of access, session availability, and the suitability of online platforms for clinical knowledge acquisition. Overall, responses show that participants’ opinions were shaped by both the clarity of educational content and the convenience of accessing it online.

For motivation to apply newly learned clinical knowledge, the LDA model (coherence = 0.37), as presented in Table VIII, revealed three themes. The first, “Comprehension,” included terms such as “topic,” “depend,” “practice,” and “learn,” suggesting that participants’ motivation was influenced by the relevance and clarity of the content presented. The second theme, “Accessibility,” comprised keywords like “information,” “get,” and “thing,” indicating that ease of access to resources played a role in motivating knowledge use. The third theme, “Applicability,” highlighted words such as “course,” “practice,” “apply,” and “use,” showing that participants were more motivated when the material aligned closely with their clinical responsibilities. These findings indicate that motivation was enhanced when content was clear, readily accessible, and applicable to real-world practice.

In Table IX, results from the LDA modelling (coherence = 0.37) also identified barriers affecting participants’ ability to apply new knowledge. The “Comprehension” theme, illustrated by keywords such as “knowledge,” “mean,” “use,” and “apply,” reflected challenges related to understanding or translating content into practice. The “Accessibility” theme, identified through terms like “course,” “time,” “face,” and “attend,” pointed to logistical and technical obstacles, including limited time and platform constraints. The third theme, “Applicability,” featuring words such as “want,” “set,” “patient,” and “medication,” suggested that some participants struggled to apply learning due to contextual factors such as patient needs or practice environments. Overall, obstacles were largely related to clarity of content, practical applicability, and logistical hurdles.

In Table X, the LDA model assessing perceived impact (coherence = 0.40) produced three themes. The “Comprehension” theme included keywords such as “learn,” “course,” “thing,” and “platform,” indicating that participants perceived online education as beneficial for improving understanding and knowledge acquisition. The “Applicability” theme, reflected in terms like “apply,” “knowledge,” “use,” and “say,” showed that participants felt online learning influenced their ability to apply what they learned in practice. The “Accessibility” theme, with  

Table Ⅲ. Opinion on Online Education.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Accessibility
0.43	1	0.060	Learn	2	0.080	Time
		0.050	Mean		0.070	Face
		0.047	Understand		0.620	Learn
		0.043	Learning		0.050	Go
		0.041	Say		0.048	Need
		0.036	Focus		0.045	Learning
		0.035	Way		0.033	Term
		0.032	Knowledge		0.031	Save
		0.032	People		0.030	Platform
		0.031	Thing		0.027	Attend

The distribution of response indicate that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (60%) than the topic of Accessibility (40%).

Table Ⅳ. Strengths of Online Learning.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Accessibility
0.43	1	0.067	Attend	2	0.082	Save
		0.064	Learn		0.063	Cost
		0.057	Time		0.058	Time
		0.049	Thing		0.055	Join
		0.040	Choose		0.044	Course
		0.036	Conference		0.042	Lot
		0.035	Topic		0.040	Need
		0.035	Example		0.038	Travel
		0.034	Say		0.033	Term
		0.033	Need		0.029	Money

The distribution of response indicate that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (52%) than the topic of Accessibility (48%).

Table Ⅴ. Weaknesses of Online Learning.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Accessibility			Comprehension
0.43	1	0.093	Internet	2	0.071	Question
		0.076	Problem		0.065	Learn
		0.062	Course		0.052	Time
		0.058	Connection		0.051	Ask
		0.048	Content		0.047	Weakness
		0.048	Tend		0.046	Focus
		0.043	Line		0.045	Go
		0.042	Say		0.044	Learning
		0.039	Need		0.043	Know
		0.039	Attend		0.042	Say

The distribution of response indicates that the topic Accessibility was more dominant (60%) than the topic of Comprehension (40%).

Table Ⅵ. How Past Experience Affects Future Participation.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Accessibility
0.40	1	0.068	Learn	2	0.174	Join
		0.062	Topic		0.072	Course
		0.062	Attend		0.067	Time
		0.053	Time		0.059	Thing
		0.050	Need		0.055	Lot
		0.044	People		0.053	Say
		0.044	Depend		0.047	Work
		0.044	Class		0.031	Travel
		0.038	Choice		0.029	Example
		0.038	Go		0.026	Know

The distribution of response indicate that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (64%) than the topic of Accessibility (36%).

Table Ⅶ. Opinion on Learning New Clinical Knowledge Online.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Accessibility
0.43	1	0.085	Need	2	0.048	Face
		0.070	Information		0.035	Get
		0.054	Problem		0.035	Session
		0.049	Course		0.035	Attend
		0.041	Say		0.031	Time
		0.040	Situation		0.031	Experience
		0.032	Base		0.031	Prefer
		0.029	Mean		0.031	Term
		0.027	Learning		0.026	Part
		0.026	Make		0.025	Hospital

The distribution of response indicates that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (60%) than the topic of Accessibility (40%).

Table Ⅷ. Motivation to Use New Knowledge.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Applicability			Accessibility
0.37	1	0.130	Topic	3	0.130	Course	2	0.160	Information
		0.102	Depend		0.114	Practice		0.100	Get
		0.095	Practice		0.107	Knowledge		0.084	Thing
		0.077	Learn		0.079	Apply		0.067	Knowledge
		0.076	Speaker		0.073	Lot		0.52	Know
		0.047	Session		0.060	Learn		0.051	Learn
		0.036	Thing		0.050	Use		0.036	Customer
		0.033	Join		0.050	Deliver		0.036	Motivate
		0.033	Understand		0.038	Get		0.036	Share
		0.033	CME		0.035	Thing		0.036	Give
The distribution of response indicate that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (48%) than the topic of Accessibility (36%) and Applicability (16%)

Table Ⅸ. Obstacles to Using New Knowledge.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Applicability			Accessibility
0.37	1	0.153	Knowledge	2	0.081	Thing	3	0.106	Course
		0.073	Mean		0.064	Want		0.093	Want
		0.064	Use		0.063	Course		0.079	Face
		0.056	Apply		0.055	Time		0.065	Understand
		0.055	Need		0.054	Set		0.064	Time
		0.047	Depend		0.046	Attend		0.049	Thing
		0.038	Learn		0.046	Learn		0.035	Patient
		0.029	Medication		0.046	Lot		0.035	Say
		0.029	Resource		0.29	Implement		0.035	Speaker
		0.029	Know		0.29	Tell		0.031	Problem
The distribution of response indicate that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (48%) than the topic of Accessibility (36%) and Applicability (16%)

Table Ⅹ. Impact of Online Education.

Coherence Value	Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords		Topic Number	Top 10 keywords
Theme		Comprehension			Accessibility			Applicability
0.37	1	0.053	Learn	2	0.075	Knowledge	3	0.072	Apply
		0.047	Course		0.067	Improve		0.058	Course
		0.043	Thing		0.052	Help		0.051	Knowledge
		0.041	Give		0.035	Compare		0.049	Use
		0.034	Face		0.035	Deliver		0.043	Thing
		0.034	Get		0.034	Face		0.041	Lot
		0.033	Help		0.034	Learn		0.037	Say
		0.029	Say		0.027	Efficiency		0.028	Learn
		0.027	Platform		0.027	Attend		0.027	Platform
		0.024	Education		0.027	Content		0.026	Prefer
The distribution of response indicate that the topic Comprehension was more dominant (44%) than the topic of Accessibility (32%) and Applicability (24%).

keywords such as “knowledge,” “improve,” “help,” and “attend,” highlighted that accessible content delivery contributed positively to participants’ learning experiences. Overall, the findings show that online education was perceived as impactful by enhancing understanding, supporting practical application, and providing efficient access to learning materials.

DISCUSSION

Descriptive Analysis

In reviewing the results of this research, as shown in Table II: Platforms Used by Participants for Online Education, participants preferred to use Zoom, Google Meet, Webex, MIMS, Microsoft Teams, SwipeRx, Icewarp, and Moodle for their online education. An article by S Birruntha supports this finding, stating that with the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, online platforms such Zoom have become the most preferred options for online education [19].

Regarding Table III: Types of Online Education, participants experienced various types of online learning, including conferences, webinars, online discussions, workshops, web-based tutorials, meetings, and presentations. In line with this, Gegenfurtner. et al. discussed in their study that webinars are preferable because they are more effective and easier to implement compared to other online platforms [20].

In terms of satisfaction level on online education, on a scale of 5, participants rated their experiences as low as 2.5 and as high as 5. Technical issues such as accessibility and functionality are the main limitations to achieving a smooth online education experience. Findings by Abbasi et al. agree that accessibility and functionality affect the satisfaction level of online education; they noted that while online education was satisfactory for acquiring knowledge, it was not as effective for developing clinical and technical skills [21].

In our study, researchers also queried participants on their actions if they did not understand topics delivered through online courses, with the results presented in Table IV. Participants usually used the chat box to ask questions for better understanding. In addition to the chat box, participants also asked the presenter directly, referred to websites, discussed with colleagues, and emailed the speaker to clarify their confusion. A study indicated that participants who were active and asked questions during online education tended to perform and understand better [22]. These findings were also confirmed by Davies and Graff, who noted significant differences between active and inactive participants in online education [23].

LDA analysis

In this study, three themes were generated by using the LDA model: comprehension, accessibility, and applicability. In terms of comprehension, consistent with other reviews, we found that online education helps pharmacists to keep up and expand their knowledge and skills [24]. Approximately 60% of participants agreed that online education helps in learning new knowledge and improves their understanding. A study by Shivangi Dhawan aligns with this finding, stating that speakers can use various platforms or programs to enhance participants’ understanding [25].

Regarding comprehension, online education also increases participants’ motivation to gain knowledge, as videos and interactive elements can be utilized [22]. However, focusing on the weaknesses of online education, we found that most participants struggled to maintain focus throughout the online sessions. This observation aligns with undergraduate research indicating that despite advances in technology, many people still find it difficult to concentrate during online courses. Extended course durations can negatively affect the attention spans of some participants [24].

In terms of accessibility, research in 2017 reported similar findings to our study, indicating that online education allows staff to gain knowledge anytime and anywhere [1]. In many health institutions, sending staff away for training courses is challenging due to understaffing, budget contraints, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, online education helps to solve these issues, by allowing staff to attend courses at their own convenience [24].

However, online education also has weaknesses in terms of accessibility. In this study, participants noted that poor internet connectivity was a significant barrier to participating in online education. This is supported by a study by John Cullinan et al., which states that various qualities of internet connections may impact the types of online education that participants can join and constrain their engagement during sessions [27]. A recent study in 2021 also stated that some participants were not fully comfortable in joining online education due to inadequate internet connectivity and technical problems [28].

Next, three questions from our interview generated applicability as a theme. For question 11, 16% of participants’ responses focused on applicability. The participants agreed that knowledge gained from online education should be shared with other colleagues to improve healthcare services. This point was also agreed by WWK Ma, who mentioned that the success of learning depends on assisting others in learning new knowledge to facilitate higher mental functions and improve services [29].

Focusing on the participants’ answers in question 12, 32% of their answers described applicability. The obstacles identified were primarily related to clarity of content, practical applicability, and logistical hurdles.

In a study by Darren Pullen, it was mentioned that applying online learning to real world practice results in more effective and efficient knowledge retention [30]. Obstacles to applying what was studied online may hamper the quest for more effective learning.  Regarding the impact of online education, the participants agreed that both online and face-to-face education had the similar effects on them. This statement was supported by Ali Alghazo, who found that online education is as effective as traditional education [31]. However, some research claims that online education is more effective than traditional classroom instruction, which contradicts the results of this study [32].

Beyond the themes previously discussed, the study’s findings further underscore the evolving expectations of pharmacists regarding the quality, structure, and delivery of online educational activities. As online learning becomes more entrenched in professional development, pharmacists are demonstrating a heightened awareness of what constitutes an effective virtual learning environment. The emphasis placed on comprehension, accessibility, and applicability suggests that participants are not merely passive recipients of information but active evaluators of how well online programs meet their learning needs. This reinforces the notion that online education must be intentionally designed to support meaningful engagement rather than simply replicating face-to-face sessions in a digital format.

The prominence of comprehension in participants’ responses highlights the importance of pedagogical strategies tailored to online modalities. Features such as clear structuring of content, presenter expertise, pacing, and the incorporation of interactive elements (e.g., polls, case examples, demonstrations) enhance cognitive engagement and learning retention. These findings align with existing literature showing that learners benefit most when online content is concise, logically organized, and visually supported. Furthermore, the challenges related to sustained attention reflect a recognized limitation of virtual learning environments, suggesting that shorter modules or segmented content delivery may improve learner engagement.

In relation to accessibility, this study reaffirms that technological reliability remains a critical determinant of successful learning. Although online education addresses geographical and scheduling constraints, persistent issues such as unstable internet connectivity, platform unfamiliarity, or lack of appropriate devices may disproportionately affect certain groups of pharmacists. Addressing this digital divide through improved infrastructure, organizational support, and targeted troubleshooting training may help ensure equitable access to online education across different practice settings.

The theme of applicability provides important insight into how pharmacists evaluate the value of online education. Participants consistently emphasized that the relevance of content to real-world practice strongly influences motivation and knowledge transfer. This supports the argument that online educational modules should be practice-oriented, incorporate real cases, and highlight direct clinical implications. Programs that fail to demonstrate practical relevance risk being perceived as less useful, even if they are well delivered. Integrating workplace-based assignments, reflective exercises, or scenario-based assessments may help bridge the gap between knowledge acquisition and real-world application.

Collectively, these additional insights highlight the need for a more structured, learner-centered approach to online education for pharmacists. Tailoring content to address professional responsibilities, integrating interactive elements, ensuring reliable technology, and demonstrating relevance to daily practice are essential strategies for improving the overall effectiveness of online learning. As the healthcare landscape continues to evolve, enhancing online education will be pivotal in supporting pharmacists’ competency development, service quality, and lifelong learning.

One of the main limitations of this study is that our subjects were primarily from the government sector, with only a minor proportion from the private sector. Participants from the private sector were community pharmacists from a single retail pharmacy, Alpro Pharmacy. Thus, the results of this research cannot be generalized to the entire population of pharmacists in Malaysia. The major participation from the government sector might reflect the effectiveness or quality of online education that government pharmacists have undergone, while researchers cannot definitively assess the effectiveness of online education in other sectors, such as community pharmacies and industries. Another main limitation to consider is the possibility of undetected minor themes or topics, as the researchers removed the most uncommon keywords which occurred in fewer than three documents. These uncommon keywords might denote another different themes that could affect the results of our research.

CONCLUSION

This study offers important insights into pharmacists’ perspectives on effective online education in Negeri Sembilan and identifies key factors that influence their learning experiences. Overall, online education was widely accepted and viewed as beneficial, particularly for its flexibility, accessibility, and suitability for ongoing professional development in settings where time and resource constraints limit opportunities for face-to-face training.

LDA modelling revealed three overarching themes­­ —comprehension, accessibility, and applicability —that shape pharmacists’ evaluations of online learning. Well-designed content and clear delivery supported understanding and motivation, whereas unstable internet connectivity and limited interaction remained notable barriers. The applicability of course content to real-world practice was also essential in determining whether newly acquired knowledge could be effectively integrated into daily work.

Although participants generally reported positive experiences and expressed a willingness to continue using online education, the findings highlight the need for improvements in course design, technological support, and practice-oriented content. Addressing these issues may enhance engagement, reduce learning challenges, and improve the practical impact of online training.

In conclusion, online education represents a valuable and increasingly indispensable platform for pharmacist training and professional development. Continued efforts to optimise content quality, accessibility, and relevance will further strengthen its effectiveness. Future studies involving larger and more diverse pharmacists and healthcare professionals, as well as comparisons across online, hybrid, and face-to-face modalities, are recommended to support the advancement of continuing education strategies in Malaysia.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to thank the Negeri Sembilan State Health Department for granting permission to conduct this study and for their continuous support throughout the research process. We also extend our appreciation to all participating pharmacists for their time, cooperation, and valuable contributions. Their insights were essential in shaping the findings of this study. The authors would also like to acknowledge the assistance provided by colleagues who contributed to data collection, administrative coordination, and technical support.

REFERENCE

Here is the fourth list formatted in the same clean, consistent Vancouver style, ready for your reference section.

1. Reeves S, Fletcher S, McLoughlin C, Yim A, Patel KD. Interprofessional online learning for primary healthcare: findings from a scoping review. BMJ Open. 2017; 7(8). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016872
2. Vaona A, Banzi R, Kwag KH, Rigon G, Cereda D, Pecoraro V, et al. E-learning for health professionals. Quad ACP. 2018; 25(2): 49. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd011736.pub2
3. Syed S, Rastogi A, Bansal A, Kumar A, Jindal A, Prakash A, et al. Future of e-learning in medical education: perception, readiness, and challenges in a developing country. Front Educ. 2021; 6: 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.598309
4. Department of Statistics Malaysia. ICT use and access by individuals and households. Putrajaya: Department of Statistics Malaysia; 2019.
5. Sacre H, Tawil S, Hallit S, Hajj A, Sili G, Salameh P. Attitudes of Lebanese pharmacists towards online and live continuing education sessions. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2019; 17(2). https://doi.org/10.18549/PharmPract.2019.2.1438
6. Ministry of Health Malaysia. myCPD2: continuing professional development [Internet]. 2025. Available from: https://www.mycpd2.moh.gov.my/home.aspx
7. Jensen TB, Srivastava A, Banerjee M, Costanzo M, Oseni T, Bhattacharya S, et al. Digital education for health professionals in India: strengths, weaknesses, thematic gaps and future research opportunities. BMJ Glob Health. 2023; 8: e011333.
8. Ameri H, Mahami-Oskouei M, Sharafi S, Saadatjoo S, Miri M, Arab-Zozani M. Investigating the strengths and weaknesses of online education during COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of professors and students of medical universities and proposing solutions: A qualitative study. Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2023; 51(1):94-102. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21691
9. Laine A, Välimäki M, Löyttyniemi E, Pekurinen V, Marttunen M, Anttila M. The Impact of a Web-Based Course Concerning Patient Education for Mental Health Care Professionals: Quasi-Experimental Study. J Med Internet Res. 2019; 21(3):e11198. https://doi.org/10.2196/11198
10. Nesterowicz K, Fereshtehnejad SM, Edelbring S. E-learning in continuing pharmacy education is effective and just as accepted as on-site learning. Pharm Educ. 2015; 15(1): 22–26. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:56255773
11. Salter SM, Karia A, Sanfilippo FM, Clifford RM. Effectiveness of e-learning in pharmacy education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2014; 78(4): 16–22. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe78483
12. Farrell B, Ward N, Jennings B, Jones C, Jorgenson D, Gubbels-Smith A, et al. Participation in online continuing education. Int J Pharm Pract. 2016; 24(1): 60–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijpp.12202
13. Feng Y, Ung K, Hui Z, Lee L, Siew M, Ahmad K. An online knowledge resource as a continuing pharmacy education tool to support reflective learning. Sarawak J Pharm. 2016; 1:16-37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338252481
14. Shawaqfeh MS, Al Bekairy AM, Al-Azayzih A, Alkatheri AA, Qandil AM, Obaidat AA, et al. Pharmacy students’ perceptions of distance online learning during COVID-19: a cross-sectional study. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2020; 7: 2382120520963039. https://doi.org/10.1177/2382120520963039
15. Marriott J, Duncan GJ, McNamara KP. Barriers to pharmacist participation in continuing education in Australia. Pharm Educ. 2007; 7(1): 11–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15602210601084176
16. Alkhateeb FM, Attarabeen OF, Alameddine S. Assessment of Texan pharmacists’ attitudes, behaviours and preferences related to continuing pharmacy education. Pharm Pract (Granada). 2016; 14(3): 769. https://doi.org/10.18549/pharmpract.2016.03.769
17. Zubala A, Lyszkiewicz K, Lee E, Underwood LL, Renfrew MJ, Gray NM. Large-scale online education programmes and their potential to effect practice change: a rapid systematic review. Interact Learn Environ. 2019; 27(5–6): 797–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1465438
18. Reio TJ, Rocco TS, Smith DH, Chang E. A critique of Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model. New Horiz Adult Educ Hum Resour Dev. 2017; 29(2): 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1002/nha3.20178
19. Birruntha S. Zoom, Microsoft Teams most popular tools for remote workers. Malaysian Reserve [Internet]. 2020 Mar 23. Available from: https://themalaysianreserve.com/2020/03/23/zoom-microsoft-teams-most-popular-tools-for-remote-workers/
20. Gegenfurtner A, Ebner C. Webinars in higher education and professional training: A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Educ Res Rev. 2019; 28: 100293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100293
21. Abbasi MS, Ahmed N, Sajjad B, Alshahrani A, Saeed S, Sarfaraz S, et al. E-Learning perception and satisfaction among health sciences students amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Work. 2020; 67(3): 549–556. https://doi.org/10.3233/wor-203308
22. Smith DH IV, Hao Q, Dennen V, Tsikerdekis M, Barnes B, Martin L, et al. Towards understanding online question & answer interactions and their effects on student performance in large-scale stem classes. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2020; 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00200-7
23. Davies J, Graff M. Performance in e-learning: online participation and student grades. Br J Educ Technol. 2005; 36(4): 657–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00542.x
24. Health O, Must P, Knowledge IT, To AY, Safe P. The importance of continuous education in healthcare. Healthcare Educ Spec Issue. 2017; 17(2): 2–4.
25. Dhawan S. Online Learning: A Panacea in the Time of COVID-19 Crisis. J Educ Technol Syst. 2020; 49(1): 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
26. Balan AK, Jacintos AR, Montemayor T. Influence of online learning on attention span and motivation. Sch Soc Sci Educ. 2020; 1–48.
27. Cullinan J, Flannery D, Harold J, Lyons S, Palcic D. The disconnected: COVID-19 and disparities in broadband for higher education students. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2021; 18(1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00262-1
28. Zalat MM, Hamed MS, Bolbol SA. The experiences, challenges, and acceptance of e-learning as a tool for teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic among university medical staff. PLoS One. 2021; 16(3): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0248758
29. Ma WWK. Online knowledge sharing. In: Encyclopedia of Cyber Behavior. IGI Global; 2012. p. 394–402. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0315-8.ch033
30. Pullen D. Doctors online: learning using an internet-based content management system. Int J Educ Dev Using Inf Commun Technol. 2013; 9(1): 50–63.
31. Alghazo A. Comparing effectiveness of online and traditional teaching using final grades. Online J Work Educ. 2010: 1–11. https://files01.core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60530022.pdf
32. Gilbert B, John S. Online learning: revealing the benefits and challenges [Master’s Thesis]. Rochester (NY): St. John Fisher College; 2015. Available from: https://fisherpub.sjf.edu/education_ETD_masters/303/