A Systematic Investigation of Assessment Scores, Self-Efficacy, and Clinical Practice: Are They Related?

Journal of CME Pub Date : 2024-10-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/28338073.2024.2420373
Katie Stringer Lucero, Donald E Moore
{"title":"A Systematic Investigation of Assessment Scores, Self-Efficacy, and Clinical Practice: Are They Related?","authors":"Katie Stringer Lucero, Donald E Moore","doi":"10.1080/28338073.2024.2420373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A considerable amount of continuing professional development (CPD) for health professionals is online and voluntary. There is evidence that some CPD activities impact clinical practice outcomes from self-reported and objective, administrative data. Some studies have shown that there is a potential mediating effect of knowledge/competency and/or self-efficacy between participation in CPD activities and the outcomes of that participation, specifically clinical practice. However, because clinical practice in those studies has been self-report, little is known about how this relationship impacts real world clinical practice. The purpose of the current study is to examine the relationship between knowledge/competency, self-efficacy, and real-world clinical practice so that we can begin to understand whether our focus on knowledge/competency and self-efficacy to change real-world clinical practice is empirically supported. We employed secondary data analysis from pre-participation questionnaire and medical and pharmacy claims data originally collected in three evaluations of online CPD interventions to examine if the relationship between knowledge/competency and self-efficacy contributed to physicians' real-world clinical practice. Results show an association between knowledge/competency scores and ratings of self-efficacy and suggest unique contributions of knowledge/competency and self-efficacy to clinical practice. Study results support the value of knowledge/competency scores and self-efficacy ratings as predictors of clinical practice. The effect size was larger for self-efficacy suggesting it may be a more practical indicator of clinical practice for CPD evaluators because its process of question development is simpler than the process for knowledge and case-based decision-making questions. However, it is important to conduct thorough need assessments which may include knowledge/competency assessments to identify topics to cover in CPD activities that are more likely to increase self-efficacy and ultimately, clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":73675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of CME","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11533230/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of CME","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/28338073.2024.2420373","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A considerable amount of continuing professional development (CPD) for health professionals is online and voluntary. There is evidence that some CPD activities impact clinical practice outcomes from self-reported and objective, administrative data. Some studies have shown that there is a potential mediating effect of knowledge/competency and/or self-efficacy between participation in CPD activities and the outcomes of that participation, specifically clinical practice. However, because clinical practice in those studies has been self-report, little is known about how this relationship impacts real world clinical practice. The purpose of the current study is to examine the relationship between knowledge/competency, self-efficacy, and real-world clinical practice so that we can begin to understand whether our focus on knowledge/competency and self-efficacy to change real-world clinical practice is empirically supported. We employed secondary data analysis from pre-participation questionnaire and medical and pharmacy claims data originally collected in three evaluations of online CPD interventions to examine if the relationship between knowledge/competency and self-efficacy contributed to physicians' real-world clinical practice. Results show an association between knowledge/competency scores and ratings of self-efficacy and suggest unique contributions of knowledge/competency and self-efficacy to clinical practice. Study results support the value of knowledge/competency scores and self-efficacy ratings as predictors of clinical practice. The effect size was larger for self-efficacy suggesting it may be a more practical indicator of clinical practice for CPD evaluators because its process of question development is simpler than the process for knowledge and case-based decision-making questions. However, it is important to conduct thorough need assessments which may include knowledge/competency assessments to identify topics to cover in CPD activities that are more likely to increase self-efficacy and ultimately, clinical practice.

对评估分数、自我效能感和临床实践的系统调查:它们有关联吗?
卫生专业人员的持续专业发展(CPD)有相当一部分是在线和自愿的。有证据表明,一些持续专业发展活动对临床实践结果产生了影响,这些影响来自自我报告和客观的行政数据。一些研究表明,知识/能力和/或自我效能在参与持续专业发展活动与参与结果(特别是临床实践)之间存在潜在的中介效应。然而,由于这些研究中的临床实践都是自我报告的,因此对这种关系如何影响现实世界的临床实践知之甚少。本研究的目的是考察知识/能力、自我效能和真实世界临床实践之间的关系,从而开始了解我们关注知识/能力和自我效能以改变真实世界临床实践是否得到了经验支持。我们对最初在三项在线继续医学教育干预评估中收集的参与前调查问卷以及医疗和药费报销数据进行了二次数据分析,以研究知识/能力和自我效能之间的关系是否有助于医生的实际临床实践。结果显示,知识/能力得分与自我效能评分之间存在关联,并表明知识/能力和自我效能对临床实践有独特的贡献。研究结果支持知识/能力评分和自我效能评分作为临床实践预测指标的价值。自我效能的效应大小更大,这表明对于继续医学教育评估人员来说,它可能是更实用的临床实践指标,因为其问题开发过程比知识和基于病例的决策问题的开发过程更简单。不过,重要的是要进行全面的需求评估,其中可能包括知识/能力评估,以确定持续专业发展活动中更有可能提高自我效能并最终提高临床实践的主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信