ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2019
Evaluation of Medical Humanities Course in College of Medicine Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction of a public health practice teaching quality evaluation system based on the CIPP model using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and entropy weight method.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Developing evaluation index system for "new medicine" construction in Chinese medical schools-meta-ethnography and Delphi-AHP approach.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Traditional Persian Medicine curriculum and educational environment at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences: A CIPP model report.Journal of education and health promotion · 2025Article
- Program evaluation of postgraduate obstetrics and gynecology training in Lao people's democratic republic - using the CIPP model.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Clinical practice experience of doctor of philosophy nurses in South Korea: a qualitative study.International journal of qualitative studies on health and well-being · 2022Article
- Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model in medical education: A systematic review.Journal of education and health promotion · 2021Review
- How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education.Journal of educational evaluation for health professions · 2019Review
- Perceptions of the first graduates of the reformed medical curriculum of the College of Medicine at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University.Journal of family & community medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeoul National University College of Medicine has provided a new educational curriculum on basis of the competency-based curriculum since 2016. The new curriculum included the medical humanities course (MHC) to potentiate humanities of medical students. The present study applied the context, input, process and product (CIPP) evaluation model to the MHC in order to confirm the feasibility of the CIPP model and to improve the MHC by questionnaire survey and analysis of teaching materials.
methodsThis study analyzed the MHC provided to the freshmen in 2016 and to the freshmen and sophomores in 2017 by the CIPP model. Firstly, evaluation criteria and indicators were developed according to the CIPP classification. The materials collected from the course were analyzed by quantitative and qualitative analysis according to the evaluation criteria. In the quantitative analysis, an independent sample
resultsThere were significant differences in perceptions of MHC between students and professors about the results of almost all objective survey questions through the t-test, such as score 3.64 in students and 4.48 in professors in response to the item of 'provision of appropriate feedback.' As a result of the content analysis, 7 categories and 20 subcategories were derived. There were the most responses to various instructional methods (students, 20%; professors, 21.5%).
conclusionThe CIPP evaluation model was acceptable for the MHC analysis. The first task is to raise students' awareness of the MHC in order to improve the MHC quality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.