Shera Hosseini, Louise Allen, Faran Khalid, Donny Li, Elizabeth Stellrecht, Michelle Howard, Teresa M Chan
{"title":"Evaluation of Continuing Professional Development for Physicians - Time for Change: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Shera Hosseini, Louise Allen, Faran Khalid, Donny Li, Elizabeth Stellrecht, Michelle Howard, Teresa M Chan","doi":"10.5334/pme.838","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evaluation of education interventions is essential for continuous improvement as it provides insights into how and why outcomes occur. Specifically, for physicians' continuing professional development (CPD) programs, which aim to upskill physicians in a range of practice-essential domains, evaluations are crucial to assure physicians' continuous development, enhanced patient care and safety. However, evaluations of health professions education (HPE) interventions tend to be outcomes focused, failing to capture how and why outcomes occur. This scoping review aimed to identify evaluation techniques used to evaluate CPD programs for physicians, and to determine how these techniques are being implemented as well as the their quality.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, among others for English publications on evaluation of CPD programs for physicians, in the past decade. We used a data charting template to extract study details regarding the evaluation techniques and produced a checklist to assess the quality of the evaluations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>101 studies were included; of which 91 studies did not use an evaluation framework. Our findings revealed shortcomings in the evaluations of CPD programs including lack of attention to: intervention processes; unintended outcomes and contextual factors; use of theory; evaluation framework use; and rationale for chosen evaluation method.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Our findings highlighted major gaps in the evaluation techniques employed in physicians' CPD. Attention needs to be paid to evaluating both program processes and outcomes to illuminate how and why impacts are or are not occurring.</p>","PeriodicalId":48532,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Medical Education","volume":"12 1","pages":"198-207"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10237247/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.838","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Evaluation of education interventions is essential for continuous improvement as it provides insights into how and why outcomes occur. Specifically, for physicians' continuing professional development (CPD) programs, which aim to upskill physicians in a range of practice-essential domains, evaluations are crucial to assure physicians' continuous development, enhanced patient care and safety. However, evaluations of health professions education (HPE) interventions tend to be outcomes focused, failing to capture how and why outcomes occur. This scoping review aimed to identify evaluation techniques used to evaluate CPD programs for physicians, and to determine how these techniques are being implemented as well as the their quality.
Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, among others for English publications on evaluation of CPD programs for physicians, in the past decade. We used a data charting template to extract study details regarding the evaluation techniques and produced a checklist to assess the quality of the evaluations.
Results: 101 studies were included; of which 91 studies did not use an evaluation framework. Our findings revealed shortcomings in the evaluations of CPD programs including lack of attention to: intervention processes; unintended outcomes and contextual factors; use of theory; evaluation framework use; and rationale for chosen evaluation method.
Discussion: Our findings highlighted major gaps in the evaluation techniques employed in physicians' CPD. Attention needs to be paid to evaluating both program processes and outcomes to illuminate how and why impacts are or are not occurring.
引言:教育干预的评估对于持续改进至关重要，因为它提供了对结果如何以及为什么发生的见解。具体来说，对于医生的持续专业发展(CPD)项目，旨在提高医生在一系列实践基本领域的技能，评估对于确保医生的持续发展，增强患者护理和安全至关重要。然而，对卫生专业教育(HPE)干预措施的评估往往以结果为重点，未能捕捉到结果如何以及为什么会发生。本综述旨在确定用于评估医师CPD项目的评估技术，并确定这些技术是如何实施的以及它们的质量。方法:我们检索了PubMed, Embase, Web of Science等在过去十年中关于医师CPD项目评估的英文出版物。我们使用数据图表模板来提取有关评估技术的研究细节，并制作了一个清单来评估评估的质量。结果:纳入101项研究;其中91项研究没有使用评估框架。我们的研究结果揭示了CPD项目评估中的缺陷，包括缺乏对干预过程的关注;意外结果和环境因素;运用理论;评价框架的使用;选择评价方法的基本原理。讨论:我们的研究结果强调了医师CPD评估技术的主要差距。需要注意评估规划过程和结果，以阐明影响如何以及为什么发生或没有发生。
期刊介绍：
Perspectives on Medical Education mission is support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices.
Official journal of the The Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO).
Perspectives on Medical Education is a non-profit Open Access journal with no charges for authors to submit or publish an article, and the full text of all articles is freely available immediately upon publication, thanks to the sponsorship of The Netherlands Association for Medical Education.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
