Dixon David, Takhar Jatinder, Macnab Jennifer, Eadie Jason, Lockyer Jocelyn, Stenerson Heather, François Jose, Bell Mary, Monette Celine, Campbell Craig, Marlow Bernie
Continuing Professional Development, Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, The University of Western Ontario, Canada.
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2011 Spring;31(2):109-16. doi: 10.1002/chp.20114.
There has been a surge of interest in the area of bias in industry-supported continuing medical education/continuing professional development (CME/CPD) activities. In 2007, we published our first study on measuring bias in CME, demonstrating that our assessment tool was valid and reliable. In light of the increasing interest in this area, and building on our experience, we wanted to further understand the application of this tool in different environments. We invited other CME/CPD providers from multiple sites in Canada to participate in a second CME bias study.
A new steering committee was established with representatives from 5 academic CME/CPD offices nationally, the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons, and the College of Family Physicians of Canada to outline the project in terms of review of the literature, refining items on the tool, updating the training guide for implementation, and establishing a resource Web site for reviewers. Training involved a train-the-trainer session with the event coordinators at each of the 5 participating centers via videoconferencing.
The content reviews from the study showed moderate inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.54), and the live reviews showed poor overall inter-rater reliability; however, one center achieved substantial inter-rater reliability (ICC = 0.68).
The analysis from this study suggests that the tool can be used as a part of a multistage process to introduce quality control mechanisms to help raise standards for CME/CPD. It is imperative to develop a cost-effective standardized training protocol that can be implemented at all sites to maximize the reliability of the tool.
业界资助的继续医学教育/继续职业发展(CME/CPD)活动中的偏倚领域引发了人们极大的兴趣。2007年,我们发表了关于衡量CME中偏倚的第一项研究,证明我们的评估工具有效且可靠。鉴于该领域的兴趣日益浓厚,基于我们的经验,我们希望进一步了解该工具在不同环境中的应用。我们邀请了加拿大多个地点的其他CME/CPD提供者参与第二项CME偏倚研究。
成立了一个新的指导委员会,成员包括来自全国5个学术CME/CPD办公室、皇家内科医师和外科医师学院以及加拿大家庭医师学院的代表,以便从文献综述、完善工具项目、更新实施培训指南以及为评审人员建立资源网站等方面概述该项目。培训包括通过视频会议与5个参与中心的活动协调员进行培训师培训课程。
该研究的内容评审显示评分者间信度中等(ICC = 0.54),现场评审显示整体评分者间信度较差;然而,一个中心实现了较高的评分者间信度(ICC = 0.68)。
该研究的分析表明,该工具可作为多阶段过程的一部分,用于引入质量控制机制,以帮助提高CME/CPD的标准。必须制定一种具有成本效益的标准化培训方案,以便在所有地点实施,以最大限度地提高该工具的信度。