Grzeskowiak Luke E, Thomas Alicia E, To Josephine, Phillips Adam J, Reeve Emily
Dr. Grzeskowiak: Postdoctoral Research Fellow, The Robinson Research Institute, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia; Pharmacist, SA Pharmacy, Flinders Medical Centre, Bedford Park, South Australia, Australia. Ms. Thomas: Pharmacist, SA Pharmacy, Repatriation General Hospital, Adelaide, Australia. Ms. To: Lecturer, School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia. Mr. Phillips: Pharmacist, Good Health Choices, Chemplus Pty Ltd, Adelaide, Australia. Ms. Reeve: PhD Candidate, School of Pharmacy and Medical Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia; Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia.
J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2015 Fall;35(4):261-9. doi: 10.1097/01.CEH.0000473130.55806.87.
This review examines the effect of incorporating clickers within practice-based education sessions on educational outcomes of health care trainees and professionals.
A systematic literature review was conducted on primary research studies published up until August 2014. Studies were identified by database searching (Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and PsychInfo), citation searching, and reference list checking. Studies were restricted to those evaluating the use of clickers as part of the provision of postgraduate education or continuing education programs and were evaluated according to Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation (reaction, learning, behavior, and results).
Seventeen studies met the eligibility criteria. Twelve studies assessed learner and/or speaker reactions, with feedback overwhelmingly positive in all studies. Reported learner benefits included increased attentiveness, engagement, and enjoyment of presentations. Speakers reported that using clickers engaged the audience and assisted in assessing audience comprehension. Eight studies assessed learning outcomes. Higher level evidence obtained from four randomized studies demonstrated significant improvements in knowledge with the use of clickers compared with traditional didactic presentations, but no differences when clickers were compared with an interactive lecture with integrated questions. No studies adequately assessed higher level educational outcomes (behavior and results).
Although the use of clickers improves learning environment and learner satisfaction, the limited high-quality data for improvements in learning and behavior outcomes make it uncertain whether the acceptance and implementation of clickers within routine practice-based education programs are warranted at this stage.
本综述探讨了在基于实践的教育课程中引入课堂应答系统对医疗保健学员和专业人员教育成果的影响。
对截至2014年8月发表的原始研究进行了系统的文献综述。通过数据库检索(Ovid MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、Scopus、Web of Science和PsychInfo)、引文检索和参考文献列表检查来识别研究。研究仅限于评估将课堂应答系统作为研究生教育或继续教育项目一部分使用情况的研究,并根据柯克帕特里克的培训评估四个层次(反应、学习、行为和结果)进行评估。
17项研究符合纳入标准。12项研究评估了学习者和/或演讲者的反应,所有研究中的反馈绝大多数是积极的。报告的学习者益处包括注意力提高、参与度增加以及对演讲的喜爱度提升。演讲者报告称,使用课堂应答系统能吸引听众并有助于评估听众的理解情况。8项研究评估了学习成果。从4项随机研究中获得的更高级别证据表明,与传统的讲授式教学相比,使用课堂应答系统在知识方面有显著改善,但与带有综合问题的互动讲座相比,使用课堂应答系统并无差异。没有研究充分评估更高级别的教育成果(行为和结果)。
尽管使用课堂应答系统改善了学习环境和学习者满意度,但关于学习和行为成果改善的高质量数据有限,使得目前尚不确定在基于实践的常规教育项目中是否有必要接受和使用课堂应答系统。