Ratelle John T, Wittich Christopher M, Yu Roger C, Newman James S, Jenkins Sarah M, Beckman Thomas J
Division of Hospital Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
J Hosp Med. 2015 Sep;10(9):569-73. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2391. Epub 2015 May 26.
There is little research regarding characteristics of effective continuing medical education (CME) presentations in hospital medicine (HM). Therefore, we sought to identify associations between validated CME teaching effectiveness scores and characteristics of CME presentations in the field of HM.
DESIGN/SETTING: This was a cross-sectional study of participants and didactic presentations from a national HM CME course in 2014.
Participants provided CME teaching effectiveness (CMETE) ratings using an instrument with known validity evidence. Overall CMETE scores (5-point scale: 1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree) were averaged for each presentation, and associations between scores and presentation characteristics were determined using the Kruskal-Wallis test. The threshold for statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
A total of 277 out of 368 participants (75.3%) completed evaluations for the 32 presentations. CMETE scores (mean [standard deviation]) were significantly associated with the use of audience response (4.64 [0.16]) versus no audience response (4.49 [0.16]; P = 0.01), longer presentations (≥30 minutes: 4.67 [0.13] vs <30 minutes: 4.51 [0.18]; P = 0.02), and larger number of slides (≥50: 4.66 [0.17] vs <50: 4.55 [0.17]; P = 0.04). There were no significant associations between CMETE scores and use of clinical cases, defined goals, or summary slides.
To our knowledge, this is the first study regarding associations between validated teaching effectiveness scores and characteristics of effective CME presentations in HM. Our findings, which support previous research in other fields, indicate that CME presentations may be improved by increasing interactivity through the use of audience response systems and allowing longer presentations.
关于医院医学(HM)中有效继续医学教育(CME)讲座的特征,相关研究较少。因此,我们试图确定经过验证的CME教学效果评分与HM领域CME讲座特征之间的关联。
设计/背景:这是一项对2014年全国HM CME课程的参与者和教学讲座进行的横断面研究。
参与者使用具有已知效度证据的工具对CME教学效果(CMETE)进行评分。对每个讲座的总体CMETE评分(5分制:1 = 强烈不同意;5 = 强烈同意)进行平均,并使用Kruskal-Wallis检验确定评分与讲座特征之间的关联。统计学显著性阈值设定为P < 0.05。
368名参与者中有277名(75.3%)完成了对32个讲座的评估。CMETE评分(均值[标准差])与使用观众反馈(4.64[0.16])显著相关,而与未使用观众反馈(4.49[0.16];P = 0.01)、讲座时间较长(≥30分钟:4.67[0.13] vs <30分钟:4.51[0.18];P = 0.02)以及幻灯片数量较多(≥50张:4.66[0.17] vs <50张:4.55[0.17];P = 0.04)显著相关。CMETE评分与临床病例的使用、明确的目标或总结幻灯片之间无显著关联。
据我们所知,这是第一项关于经过验证的教学效果评分与HM中有效CME讲座特征之间关联的研究。我们的研究结果支持了其他领域的先前研究,表明通过使用观众反馈系统增加互动性并允许更长的讲座时间,可能会改善CME讲座。