ArticleThe Journal of continuing education in the health professions
Improved Activity Evaluations: An Iterative Process Using the Rasch Model.
Article in The Journal of continuing education in the health professions. 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
introductionTraditional evaluation models, often linear and outcome-focused, are increasingly inadequate for the complexities of modern medical education, which demands more comprehensive and nuanced assessment approaches.
methodsA standardized continuing professional development activity evaluation instrument was developed and implemented. An iterative process was performed, using a repeat Rasch analysis, to improve reliability of the evaluation instrument. Category Probability Curves and Test Information Function were generated by the Rasch analysis to refine the construction of the assessment. All educational activities completed between 2022 and 2024 were eligible for inclusion. The study incorporated a diverse range of educational activities and included multiple health care professions.
resultsThe pilot analysis included 250 educational activities with 26,554 individual learners completing evaluations for analysis. Initial Rasch findings demonstrated a need to remove redundancies and change from a five to four-point rating scale. The final instrument validation included 21 activities and 529 learners. Improvement was seen in reliability after modifications, with an increase in Cronbach alpha from 0.72 to 0.80. DISCUSSION: Use of psychometrics to improve assessments can yield a more reliable and less redundant evaluation instrument. This research demonstrates a psychometrically informed, flexible evaluation tool that can inform future educational efforts and serve as a data driven metric to enhance the quality of continuing professional development programs.
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.