Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33178489›Full record

ArticleJournal of European CME2020

Qualitative Outcomes in CME/CPD: Exploring Non-Linear Contexts and Lived Experiences in Patient-Directed Interventions.

Alexandra Howson, Wendy Turell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of European CME, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Alexandra HowsonThistle Editorial, LLC, Snoqualmie, WA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1740-2925
Wendy TurellCME Outcomes and Analytics, PlatformQ Health Education, Needham, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

interviewsPatient educationperspectivesqualitative outcomestethered education

Identifiers

PMID33178489
PMCPMC7595083

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.