Impact of a Provincial Asthma Guidelines Continuing Medical Education Project: The Ontario Asthma Plan of Action’s Provider Education in Asthma Care Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care funded the Ontario Lung Association to develop and implement a continuing medical education program to promote implementation of the Canadian asthma guidelines in primary care. OBJECTIVES: To determine baseline knowledge, preferred learning format, satisfaction with the program and reported impact on practice patterns. METHODS: A 3 h workshop was developed that combined didactic presentations and small group case discussions. Outcome measures included a workshop evaluation, baseline assessment of asthma management knowledge and three-month postreflective evaluations. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-seven workshops were delivered to 2783 primary care providers (1313 physicians, 1470 allied health) between September 2002 and March 2005. Of the 2133 participants, 1007 physicians and 1126 allied health professionals submitted workshop evaluations. Most (98%) of the attendees indicated they would recommend the workshop to a colleague. The majority preferred the combination of didactic lecture plus interactive case discussions. A subset of physicians provided consent to use these data for research (n=298 pediatric and 288 adult needs assessments; n=349 postreflective evaluations). Important needs identified included appropriate medication for chronic asthma and development of written action plans. On the postreflective evaluations, 88.7% remained very satisfied, 95.5% reported increased confidence, 91.9% reported an influence on practice and 67.2% reported using a written action plan. CONCLUSIONS: This continuing medical education program addresses identified needs of primary care providers. Participants reported improvements in asthma care, including prescribing practices, use of spirometry and written action plans. Similar programs should be considered as part of multifaceted asthma guidelines dissemination and implementation initiatives in other provinces and nationally.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".