|LETTER TO EDITOR
|Year : 2019 | Volume
| Issue : 1 | Page : 43
Problems and pitfalls in PowerPoint® presentation
Sora Yasri1, Viroj Wiwanitkit2
1 KMT Primary Care Center, Bangkok, Thailand
2 Department of Community Medicine, Dr. D. Y. Patil University, Pune, Maharashtra, India
|Date of Web Publication||20-Jun-2019|
Dr. Sora Yasri
KMT Primary Care Center, Bangkok
Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None
|How to cite this article:|
Yasri S, Wiwanitkit V. Problems and pitfalls in PowerPoint® presentation. BLDE Univ J Health Sci 2019;4:43
We read the publication on “Split attention effect and imagination effect-two potential pitfalls in PowerPoint® presentation?” with great interest. We agree that the mentioned effects are the important pitfalls for PowerPoint® presentation. Indeed, the PowerPoint® presentation is widely used in the medical education at present. Nevertheless, the quality of the PowerPoint® presentation is little mentioned. There also other possible pitfalls and problems in using PowerPoint® presentation. The alteration of the font size and figure color due to the background design in PowerPoint® presentation is common. Regarding the content in the PowerPoint® presentation, the plagiarism of the content is possible. Many PowerPoint® presentation files are freely available online and the direct copy of the PowerPoint® presentation, which is considered a plagiarism, by the medical student is common. In a recent report from Iran, <50% of the medical students recognized “proper referencing in Microsoft PowerPoint slideshows.”
Financial support and sponsorship
Conflicts of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
| References|| |
Kumar VD. Split attention effect and imagination effect-two potential pitfalls in PowerPoint® presentation? BLDE Univ J Health Sci 2018;3:124-5. [Full text]
Gharedaghi MH, Nourijelyani K, Salehi Sadaghiani M, Yousefzadeh-Fard Y, Gharedaghi A, Javadian P, et al.
Knowledge of medical students of Tehran University of Medical Sciences regarding plagiarism. Acta Med Iran 2013;51:418-24.