MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617495957 · doi:10.1097/ceh.0000000000000154

Rebooting Kirkpatrick: Integrating Information System Theory Into the Evaluation of Web-based Continuing Professional Development Interventions for Interprofessional Education

2017· review· en· W2617495957 on OpenAlexaff
Nelson Shen, Shira Yufe, Omid Saadatfard, Sanjeev Sockalingam, David Wiljer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUsabilityPsychological interventionInformation systemQuality (philosophy)Knowledge managementPsychologyMedical educationComputer scienceProcess managementMedicineNursingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Information system research has stressed the importance of theory in understanding how user perceptions can motivate the use and adoption of technology such as web-based continuing professional development programs for interprofessional education (WCPD-IPE). A systematic review was conducted to provide an information system perspective on the current state of WCPD-IPE program evaluation and how current evaluations capture essential theoretical constructs in promoting technology adoption. METHODS: Six databases were searched to identify studies evaluating WCPD-IPE. Three investigators determined eligibility of the articles. Evaluation items extracted from the studies were assessed using the Kirkpatrick-Barr framework and mapped to the Benefits Evaluation Framework. RESULTS: Thirty-seven eligible studies yielded 362 evaluation items for analysis. Most items (n = 252) were assessed as Kirkpatrick-Barr level 1 (reaction) and were mainly focused on the quality (information, service, and quality) and satisfaction dimensions of the Benefits Evaluation. System quality was the least evaluated quality dimension, accounting for 26 items across 13 studies. WCPD-IPE use was reported in 17 studies and its antecedent factors were evaluated in varying degrees of comprehensiveness. DISCUSSION: Although user reactions were commonly evaluated, greater focus on user perceptions of system quality (ie, functionality and performance), usefulness, and usability of the web-based platform is required. Surprisingly, WCPD-IPE use was reported in less than half of the studies. This is problematic as use is a prerequisite to realizing any individual, organizational, or societal benefit of WCPD-IPE. This review proposes an integrated framework which accounts for these factors and provides a theoretically grounded guide for future evaluations.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.556
Teacher spread0.431 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Continuing Education in the Health ProfessionsSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207