Rethinking the Impact of Single Continuing Educational Activities: Navigating Complexity Through Insights from Real-World Evaluation and Contemporary Literature.

Journal of CME Pub Date : 2025-05-12 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/28338073.2025.2498292
Robert Schaefer, Joerg Stein, Louise Niven, Mia Hill, Onno Kaagman, Anja J Gerrits, Pan Chen, Yvonne Oliver, Eugene Pozniak, Cara L Mcfarlane, Denise Thom, Arne Stachmann, Giovanni Torsello, Reinhard Griebenow
{"title":"Rethinking the Impact of Single Continuing Educational Activities: Navigating Complexity Through Insights from Real-World Evaluation and Contemporary Literature.","authors":"Robert Schaefer, Joerg Stein, Louise Niven, Mia Hill, Onno Kaagman, Anja J Gerrits, Pan Chen, Yvonne Oliver, Eugene Pozniak, Cara L Mcfarlane, Denise Thom, Arne Stachmann, Giovanni Torsello, Reinhard Griebenow","doi":"10.1080/28338073.2025.2498292","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Real-world evaluation data strongly suggest that substantial multi-level heterogeneity of continuing education (CE) audiences, though considered highly desirable, poses severe challenges to the assessment of what a single CE activity might have contributed to either improve or maintain achievements or prevent change for the worse. This relates in particular to change in higher levels of outcomes, such as performance, patient health, and/or community health. This sets narrow limits to the design of an objective, reliable and reasonably valid assessment of change in evaluating the effectiveness of a single CE activity. Although CE may be more effective in leading to consistent behaviour in homogeneous groups with regard to background and motivation, trying to reduce the various levels of heterogeneity would be an unrealistic, and also unwanted, approach. Thus, we still have to trust physicians (and other healthcare professionals) to exercise their professionalism in pursuit of individual opinion forming trajectories in the best interests of their patients. However, providers may also choose some more targeted approaches to influence the mindset even in heterogeneous learner groups: - integrating not only knowledge and competence but also current performance gaps into pre-/post-tests - increasing opportunities for discussion will allow optimal matching of the individual needs of participants with the CE content. When reported, unprecedented numbers of participants' questions (>50 per webinar) have been processed during and/or after an e-learning activity, and even higher numbers of interactions might be expected in demand use of e-learning material. Thus, e-learning in combination with long-term faculty engagement has promising potential for sustainable competence.</p>","PeriodicalId":73675,"journal":{"name":"Journal of CME","volume":"14 1","pages":"2498292"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12077434/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of CME","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/28338073.2025.2498292","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Real-world evaluation data strongly suggest that substantial multi-level heterogeneity of continuing education (CE) audiences, though considered highly desirable, poses severe challenges to the assessment of what a single CE activity might have contributed to either improve or maintain achievements or prevent change for the worse. This relates in particular to change in higher levels of outcomes, such as performance, patient health, and/or community health. This sets narrow limits to the design of an objective, reliable and reasonably valid assessment of change in evaluating the effectiveness of a single CE activity. Although CE may be more effective in leading to consistent behaviour in homogeneous groups with regard to background and motivation, trying to reduce the various levels of heterogeneity would be an unrealistic, and also unwanted, approach. Thus, we still have to trust physicians (and other healthcare professionals) to exercise their professionalism in pursuit of individual opinion forming trajectories in the best interests of their patients. However, providers may also choose some more targeted approaches to influence the mindset even in heterogeneous learner groups: - integrating not only knowledge and competence but also current performance gaps into pre-/post-tests - increasing opportunities for discussion will allow optimal matching of the individual needs of participants with the CE content. When reported, unprecedented numbers of participants' questions (>50 per webinar) have been processed during and/or after an e-learning activity, and even higher numbers of interactions might be expected in demand use of e-learning material. Thus, e-learning in combination with long-term faculty engagement has promising potential for sustainable competence.

重新思考单一继续教育活动的影响:通过现实世界评价和当代文学的见解来导航复杂性。
现实世界的评估数据强烈表明,尽管继续教育(CE)的受众被认为是非常理想的,但对评估单一的CE活动可能对改善或保持成就或防止变化做出的贡献提出了严峻的挑战。这尤其涉及绩效、患者健康和/或社区健康等高级结果的变化。这对设计客观、可靠和合理有效的评估单一环境行政活动有效性变化的评估设置了狭窄的限制。虽然在背景和动机方面,社会教育可能更有效地导致同质群体的一致行为,但试图减少不同程度的异质性将是一种不现实的,也是不需要的方法。因此,我们仍然必须相信医生(和其他医疗保健专业人员)在追求个人意见形成轨迹时行使他们的专业精神,以达到患者的最大利益。然而,提供者也可以选择一些更有针对性的方法来影响甚至在异质学习者群体中的心态:-不仅将知识和能力,而且将当前的表现差距纳入前/后测试-增加讨论的机会将使参与者的个人需求与CE内容进行最佳匹配。在报告中,在电子学习活动期间和/或之后处理了空前数量的参与者问题(每个网络研讨会50个),并且在使用电子学习材料的需求中可能会有更多的互动。因此,与教师长期参与相结合的电子学习具有可持续能力的潜力。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信