**3. Conclusion**

The migration from virtual to classroom education is essential in medical education. It is not a substitute for clinical practice, face to face with the real patient; however, hybrid or mixed strategies and curricular redesigns should be sought in the immediate and mediate future of the training of the medical professional. Among the fundamental elements are not improvising, but planning in hybrid or mixed options; consider the differences between face-to-face and virtual education; managers must be involved in the transformation; carry out adequate and pertinent teacher training about ICT in daily didactic and pedagogical activity. Acquire the relevant technological equipment for migration, including servers, Internet capacity, and diagnosis of the needs of teachers and students to carry out the migration properly.

Students are comfortable with technology-based solutions to support learning and assessment, and with peer communication tools. Pandemic circumstances have pushed teachers to acquire skills in using online resources to teach and meet students like never before. Now, we lack patients and a professional care environment. A lot of work is needed to ensure the privacy of participants, compliance with data protection regulations, quality, inclusion and fairness, support for students and teachers, among other key issues. They can be resolved effectively through intra- and inter-institutional cooperation, preferably on an international scale. The COVID-19 emergency will eventually end. By then, the whole concept and system of medical education will have been reinvented, having served as an *in vivo* experiment. For now, universities and health institutions need to collaborate and promote new forms of distance professional education experiences. COVID-19 will have made us all more aware and interested in participating in this process.

As of this quarantine, every one of the universities, certain policies were generally adopted that were applied throughout the country: Face-to-face classes became virtual; universities have had to offer platforms to include their students and to be able to have classes online. This requires a smartphone that can connect to the respective platform with Internet paid for by the student, or laptop computers or iPad's, owned by the student. In the hospitals where I work (General Hospital of Zone No. 36 of the IMSS and General Hospital of Minatitlán) that are public, residents have all the means such as Internet to carry out their academic care work.

We use ICT a lot, whether for conferences *via* webinars, distance classes, and even on-call delivery. This is because some are rotating in other hospitals. In Internal Medicine, the visit pass, the interaction with the patient and with teachers and colleagues, can never be replaced by the Internet or other digital media. There will be greater and faster access to information through smartphones and computers, but human contact will always be necessary, to be equal to or better than the graduates of the "traditional" programs of medicine depending on the use given to them by each individual.

The new insurance doctors will be different from "the old ones." The simple fact of living in confinement due to the pandemic, implying that they suddenly cut their studies, has made them approach learning issues in different ways. New doctors have to face a "new normal" that we may not know what it will be like once we try to return to the life we had every day. Telemedicine is undoubtedly a tool that has accelerated its use and it seems that it will continue in various ways. They will have

to get used to teaching and learning in new formats, but at this point, the fact of reaching the comprehensive review of a patient live and in-person should be landed (see Section 4).
