An Eclectic Model for Evaluating Web Based Continuing Medical Education Courseware Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
World Wide Web and compact disc-read only memory technologies have introduced new prospects for delivering continuing medical education (CME) to rural and remote physicians. However, evidence concerning the effectiveness of these technologies in providing CME, and approaches to their evaluation, is limited. The rationale for this study was to design a model for evaluating the effectiveness of computer-mediated CME courseware. An eclectic, evaluation-planning matrix was designed by selecting various concepts from the literature and was used in planning and developing the evaluation model. The model was field-tested by evaluating a computer-mediated courseware program on dermatological office procedures, and a meta-evaluation was conducted to assess the effectiveness of the evaluation methods and procedures. The findings suggest that the model was useful in collecting data to inform decision making and to improve the instructional product. The field test results revealed that computer-mediated instruction was effective in delivering CME at a distance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it