MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135480115 · doi:10.1186/s12909-021-02607-w

Information and communication technology to enhance continuing professional development (CPD) and continuing medical education (CME) for Rwanda: a scoping review of reviews

2021· review· en· W3135480115 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Lune Ngenzi, Richard E. Scott, Maurice Mars

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medical Education · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersFogarty International Center
KeywordsMedical educationInformation and Communications TechnologyContinuing medical educationThe InternetIntervention (counseling)Health careBlended learningProfessional developmentMedicinePsychologyKnowledge managementContinuing educationNursingComputer scienceEducational technologyPedagogyWorld Wide WebPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Access to high quality continuing professional development (CPD) is necessary for healthcare professionals to retain competency within the ever-evolving worlds of medicine and health. Most low- and middle-income countries, including Rwanda, have a critical shortage of healthcare professionals and limited access to CPD opportunities. This study scoped the literature using review articles related to the use of information and communication technology (ICT) and video conferencing for the delivery of CPD to healthcare professionals. The goal was to inform decision-makers of relevant and suitable approaches for a low-income country such as Rwanda. METHODS: PubMed and hand searching was used. Only review articles written in English, published between 2010 and 2019, and reporting the use of ICT for CPD were included. RESULTS: Six review articles were included in this study. Various delivery modes (face to face, pure elearning and blended learning) and technology approaches (Internet-based and non-Internet based) were reported. All types of technology approach enhanced knowledge, skills and attitudes. Pure elearning is comparable to face-to-face delivery and better than 'no intervention', and blended learning showed mixed results compared to traditional face-to-face learning. Participant satisfaction was attributed to ease of use, easy access and interactive content. CONCLUSION: The use of technology to enhance CPD delivery is acceptable with most technology approaches improving knowledge, skills and attitude. For the intervention to work effectively, CPD courses must be well designed: needs-based, based on sound educational theories, interactive, easy to access, and affordable. Participants must possess the required devices and technological literacy.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.439 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations42
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC Medical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207