CME/CPD的定性结果:探索非线性背景和患者导向干预的生活经验。

Alexandra Howson, Wendy Turell
{"title":"CME/CPD的定性结果:探索非线性背景和患者导向干预的生活经验。","authors":"Alexandra Howson,&nbsp;Wendy Turell","doi":"10.1080/21614083.2020.1834760","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Qualitative analysis is often used to gather insights about learning, behavioural and practice change. Given the rich detail that qualitative data delivers, we are puzzled at the relative absence of qualitative approaches to outcomes assessment in the field of CME/CPD, especially as patient-directed education becomes increasingly tethered or adjunctive to CME/CPD programmes as a way to directly engage patients in disease self-management and improve health outcomes. Education outcomes for both clinicians and patients are contextualised by norms, motivations, and values that shape how learners interact with education activities and materials. These properties are linked to and shape the mechanisms that drive education outcomes but are rarely the focus of assessments that are often rooted in quantitative, positivist frameworks. In order to illustrate the role that qualitative methodologies can play in outcomes assessment, we describe insights from three education programmes designed to improve the health of patients with specific conditions and outline a range of qualitative methodologies appropriate for outcomes evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":87300,"journal":{"name":"Journal of European CME","volume":"9 1","pages":"1834760"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21614083.2020.1834760","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Qualitative Outcomes in CME/CPD: Exploring Non-Linear Contexts and Lived Experiences in Patient-Directed Interventions.\",\"authors\":\"Alexandra Howson,&nbsp;Wendy Turell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21614083.2020.1834760\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Qualitative analysis is often used to gather insights about learning, behavioural and practice change. Given the rich detail that qualitative data delivers, we are puzzled at the relative absence of qualitative approaches to outcomes assessment in the field of CME/CPD, especially as patient-directed education becomes increasingly tethered or adjunctive to CME/CPD programmes as a way to directly engage patients in disease self-management and improve health outcomes. Education outcomes for both clinicians and patients are contextualised by norms, motivations, and values that shape how learners interact with education activities and materials. These properties are linked to and shape the mechanisms that drive education outcomes but are rarely the focus of assessments that are often rooted in quantitative, positivist frameworks. In order to illustrate the role that qualitative methodologies can play in outcomes assessment, we describe insights from three education programmes designed to improve the health of patients with specific conditions and outline a range of qualitative methodologies appropriate for outcomes evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":87300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of European CME\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"1834760\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/21614083.2020.1834760\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of European CME\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21614083.2020.1834760\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of European CME","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21614083.2020.1834760","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定性分析通常用于收集有关学习、行为和实践变化的见解。考虑到定性数据提供的丰富细节,我们对CME/CPD领域相对缺乏定性方法来评估结果感到困惑,特别是当以患者为导向的教育越来越多地束缚或辅助于CME/CPD项目,作为直接让患者参与疾病自我管理和改善健康结果的一种方式时。临床医生和患者的教育结果取决于规范、动机和价值观,这些规范、动机和价值观塑造了学习者如何与教育活动和材料互动。这些属性与推动教育成果的机制有关,并形成了这些机制,但很少成为评估的重点,因为评估往往植根于定量的实证主义框架。为了说明定性方法在结果评估中可以发挥的作用,我们描述了三个旨在改善特定疾病患者健康的教育计划的见解,并概述了一系列适用于结果评估的定性方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Qualitative Outcomes in CME/CPD: Exploring Non-Linear Contexts and Lived Experiences in Patient-Directed Interventions.

Qualitative analysis is often used to gather insights about learning, behavioural and practice change. Given the rich detail that qualitative data delivers, we are puzzled at the relative absence of qualitative approaches to outcomes assessment in the field of CME/CPD, especially as patient-directed education becomes increasingly tethered or adjunctive to CME/CPD programmes as a way to directly engage patients in disease self-management and improve health outcomes. Education outcomes for both clinicians and patients are contextualised by norms, motivations, and values that shape how learners interact with education activities and materials. These properties are linked to and shape the mechanisms that drive education outcomes but are rarely the focus of assessments that are often rooted in quantitative, positivist frameworks. In order to illustrate the role that qualitative methodologies can play in outcomes assessment, we describe insights from three education programmes designed to improve the health of patients with specific conditions and outline a range of qualitative methodologies appropriate for outcomes evaluation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
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