PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 17045365

Evaluating healthcare education: issues and methods.

Abstract

This paper analyses the methodological issues inherent in evaluating healthcare education and considers approaches for addressing these. Recent policies have exhorted practitioners to base their practice on evidence; however in healthcare education the evidence base is not extensive. Whilst educational evaluation has advanced in the last decades, standardised designs and toolkits are not available. Each evaluation has different aims and occurs in specific contexts, thus the design has to fit the circumstances, yet meet the challenge of scientific credibility. Indicators of educational processes and outcomes are not scientifically verified; no toolkit of standardised 'off-the-shelf' valid, reliable and sensitive measures exists. The evidence base of educational practice is largely derived from small-scale, single case studies; the majority of measures are self-devised, unvalidated tools of unproven reliability, thus meta-synthesis is not appropriate and results are not generalisable. Healthcare educational evaluators need valid and reliable assessments of both knowledge acquisition and its application to practice. The need to establish and explain attribution, i.e. the relationship between educational inputs and outcomes is complex and requires experimental/quasi-experimental design. In addition, educational evaluators face the pragmatic challenge of practice in healthcare contexts, where confounding variables are hard to control and resources are scarce.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Moira Attree. 2006-10-11. Evaluating healthcare education: issues and methods.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2006.07.014

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Psychiatric disorder criteria and their application to research in different racial groups.

BACKGROUND: The advent of standardized classification and assessment of psychiatric disorders, and considerable joint efforts among many countries has led to the reporting of international rates of psychiatric disorders, and inevitably, their comparison between different racial groups. RESULTS: In neurologic diseases with defined genetic etiologies, the same genetic cause has different phenotypes in different racial groups. CONCLUSION: We suggest that genetic differences between races mean that diagnostic criteria refined in one racial group, may not be directly and simply applicable to other racial groups and thus more effort needs to be expended on defining diseases in other groups. Cross-racial confounds (in addition to cultural confounds) make the interpretation of rates in different groups even more hazardous than seems to have been appreciated.

Confounding Factors, Epidemiologic↗