Herman Stoevelaar, Amit Bahl, Nicky Helsen, Nele R M Michels, Louis Smets, Mark J Speakman, Johan Stranne, Jaan Toelen, Frank Van der Aa, Luc Van Ruysevelt, Jessa Yperman, Thomas Zilli, Bertrand F Tombal, Martin C Michel
{"title":"个性化与非个性化基于案例的CME:一项随机试点研究。","authors":"Herman Stoevelaar, Amit Bahl, Nicky Helsen, Nele R M Michels, Louis Smets, Mark J Speakman, Johan Stranne, Jaan Toelen, Frank Van der Aa, Luc Van Ruysevelt, Jessa Yperman, Thomas Zilli, Bertrand F Tombal, Martin C Michel","doi":"10.1080/21614083.2022.2153438","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The PinPoint Case Platform (PPCP) offers independent online case-based CME. To align with personal learning needs, a functionality of needs assessments (\"QuickScan\") was developed, directing users to follow personalised case journeys. A randomised study was conducted, comparing its effectiveness, time efficiency and user experience with a format of non-individualised case-based learning. Forty-two residents in urology from five European countries were randomly assigned to follow non-individualised case-based learning (control group) or a needs assessment plus personalised case journeys on different topics in prostate cancer. After performing a pre- and post-assessment, both groups showed a similar increase in test scores (Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> = 247; p = .113), but the time needed for completing the learning exercise was significantly lower in the group with the personalised approach (median: 45 vs 90 minutes; Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> = 97.5; p = .0141). The quality of the two learning methods was similarly well received by both groups. In conclusion, learners who followed personalised case journeys learned similarly effective but more time efficient than non-individualised case-based learners. Future studies should determine if these findings can be extrapolated to board-certified physicians following CME activities.</p>","PeriodicalId":87300,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European CME","volume":"11 1","pages":"2153438"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/11/bc/ZJEC_11_2153438.PMC9718550.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Personalised versus non-individualised case-based CME: A randomised pilot study.\",\"authors\":\"Herman Stoevelaar, Amit Bahl, Nicky Helsen, Nele R M Michels, Louis Smets, Mark J Speakman, Johan Stranne, Jaan Toelen, Frank Van der Aa, Luc Van Ruysevelt, Jessa Yperman, Thomas Zilli, Bertrand F Tombal, Martin C Michel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21614083.2022.2153438\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The PinPoint Case Platform (PPCP) offers independent online case-based CME. To align with personal learning needs, a functionality of needs assessments (\\\"QuickScan\\\") was developed, directing users to follow personalised case journeys. A randomised study was conducted, comparing its effectiveness, time efficiency and user experience with a format of non-individualised case-based learning. Forty-two residents in urology from five European countries were randomly assigned to follow non-individualised case-based learning (control group) or a needs assessment plus personalised case journeys on different topics in prostate cancer. After performing a pre- and post-assessment, both groups showed a similar increase in test scores (Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> = 247; p = .113), but the time needed for completing the learning exercise was significantly lower in the group with the personalised approach (median: 45 vs 90 minutes; Mann-Whitney <i>U</i> = 97.5; p = .0141). The quality of the two learning methods was similarly well received by both groups. In conclusion, learners who followed personalised case journeys learned similarly effective but more time efficient than non-individualised case-based learners. Future studies should determine if these findings can be extrapolated to board-certified physicians following CME activities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of European CME\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"2153438\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/11/bc/ZJEC_11_2153438.PMC9718550.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of European CME\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21614083.2022.2153438\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of European CME","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21614083.2022.2153438","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
PinPoint案例平台(PPCP)提供独立的在线案例CME。为了配合个人学习需求,开发了需求评估功能(“QuickScan”),指导用户遵循个性化的案例旅程。进行了一项随机研究,将其有效性,时间效率和用户体验与非个性化基于案例的学习形式进行比较。来自5个欧洲国家的42名泌尿科住院医师被随机分配到非个体化的病例学习(对照组)或需求评估加上前列腺癌不同主题的个体化病例之旅。在进行了前后评估后,两组的测试成绩都有相似的提高(Mann-Whitney U = 247;P = .113),但完成学习练习所需的时间在个性化方法组明显更低(中位数:45 vs 90分钟;Mann-Whitney U = 97.5;P = .0141)。这两种学习方法的质量同样受到两组学生的好评。总之,遵循个性化案例学习的学习者与非个性化案例学习者学习效果相似,但时间效率更高。未来的研究应该确定这些发现是否可以外推到CME活动后的委员会认证医生。
Personalised versus non-individualised case-based CME: A randomised pilot study.
The PinPoint Case Platform (PPCP) offers independent online case-based CME. To align with personal learning needs, a functionality of needs assessments ("QuickScan") was developed, directing users to follow personalised case journeys. A randomised study was conducted, comparing its effectiveness, time efficiency and user experience with a format of non-individualised case-based learning. Forty-two residents in urology from five European countries were randomly assigned to follow non-individualised case-based learning (control group) or a needs assessment plus personalised case journeys on different topics in prostate cancer. After performing a pre- and post-assessment, both groups showed a similar increase in test scores (Mann-Whitney U = 247; p = .113), but the time needed for completing the learning exercise was significantly lower in the group with the personalised approach (median: 45 vs 90 minutes; Mann-Whitney U = 97.5; p = .0141). The quality of the two learning methods was similarly well received by both groups. In conclusion, learners who followed personalised case journeys learned similarly effective but more time efficient than non-individualised case-based learners. Future studies should determine if these findings can be extrapolated to board-certified physicians following CME activities.