ArticleJournal of CME2025
Rethinking the Impact of Single Continuing Educational Activities: Navigating Complexity Through Insights from Real-World Evaluation and Contemporary Literature.
Article in Journal of CME, 2025. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Real-world evaluation data strongly suggest that substantial multi-level heterogeneity of continuing education (CE) audiences, though considered highly desirable, poses severe challenges to the assessment of what a single CE activity might have contributed to either improve or maintain achievements or prevent change for the worse. This relates in particular to change in higher levels of outcomes, such as performance, patient health, and/or community health. This sets narrow limits to the design of an objective, reliable and reasonably valid assessment of change in evaluating the effectiveness of a single CE activity. Although CE may be more effective in leading to consistent behaviour in homogeneous groups with regard to background and motivation, trying to reduce the various levels of heterogeneity would be an unrealistic, and also unwanted, approach. Thus, we still have to trust physicians (and other healthcare professionals) to exercise their professionalism in pursuit of individual opinion forming trajectories in the best interests of their patients. However, providers may also choose some more targeted approaches to influence the mindset even in heterogeneous learner groups: - integrating not only knowledge and competence but also current performance gaps into pre-/post-tests - increasing opportunities for discussion will allow optimal matching of the individual needs of participants with the CE content. When reported, unprecedented numbers of participants' questions (>50 per webinar) have been processed during and/or after an e-learning activity, and even higher numbers of interactions might be expected in demand use of e-learning material. Thus, e-learning in combination with long-term faculty engagement has promising potential for sustainable competence.
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.