ArticleBMC medical education2024
Empowering Continuing Medical Education (CME) in India: leveraging Kern's instructional design model.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionContinuing Medical Education (CME) is vital for healthcare professionals to remain current with advancements and maintain their competence. In India, CME remains in its early stages, lacking a systematic approach. There is a pressing need for a comprehensive framework that addresses needs assessment, program development, accreditation, and credit allocation. Specifically, there is a gap in delivering targeted CME that meets the needs of different medical professionals at appropriate times. The aim of this study is to employ Kern's six steps of curriculum design to plan and evaluate a faculty development program focused on Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) for MD (Doctor of Medicine) Biochemistry professionals.
methodsThis study utilized Kern's six-step approach to design a training program on Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) tailored for MD Biochemistry professionals. Approval was obtained from the Institutional Human Ethics Committee. Following problem identification, a targeted needs assessment was conducted through expert consultations. The goal of the program was established, focusing on the development and delivery of an interactive online CME program. The program was developed, implemented and evaluated using surveys and feedback questionnaires.
resultsA comprehensive literature review revealed a notable gap in EPA-related works for MD Biochemistry program. Expert consultations highlighted significant training needs and barriers, such as limited resources and professional commitments. Consequently, the program's primary objective was to raise awareness and sensitize participants to EPA development. A 4-h online CME was designed, featuring expert-led sessions and collaborative group activities. The program attracted 152 participants and utilized interactive elements, such as polls and chats, to foster engagement. Group activities allowed participants to apply concepts in EPA validation. Pre- and post-program surveys demonstrated significant improvements in participants' knowledge and confidence. Feedback highlighted the practical relevance of the content and the interactive, hands-on nature of the sessions.
conclusionKern's six-step approach provided a structured and effective framework for developing the CME program, addressing identified needs and barriers, and enhancing faculty development in MD Biochemistry. This study underscores the importance of a systematic approach in CME to improve program effectiveness.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.