Digital Literacy Training for Digitalization Officers (“Digi-Managers”) in Outpatient Medical and Psychotherapeutic Care: Conceptualization and Longitudinal Evaluation of a Certificate Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Digital tools, services, and information in patient care demand new competencies in outpatient care, and the workforce is faced with the need to deal with digitalization. Objective: In a targeted certificate course (Certification of Digitalization Officers in Medical Practices and Psychotherapeutic Practices, Digi-Manager), medical assistants are trained to serve as digitalization officers, enabling them to implement the requirements of digitalized health care within their practices. Methods: As part of an accompanying study, the course is evaluated by the participants, and the change in their digital literacy is recorded. We measured different knowledge, skills, and attitude dimensions at 3 different times-before, during, and after the course-and used ANOVA to examine significant changes. Results: Digi-Managers started the course with an already high self-assessment of their digital literacy. Skills and knowledge increased significantly in all categories (cognitive, technical, ethical, and health information) from the initial to the final measurement, as did self-confidence in the use of general software and hardware. Positive attitude remained stable over the training period, and the course was rated very positively by participants across all areas. Conclusions: Training programs on digital topics for health care professionals are necessary, and this certification course is a role model for successful further education through a mixture of theoretical knowledge transfer and practical application. Especially, the use of a digital maturity model and a digital laboratory was a unique and useful feature. Further research needs to go into alternative assessment methods of digital literacy, as the results suggest that self-assessment measures self-efficacy and confidence, rather than pure competence. Nevertheless, the increase in self-assessed competence suggests that the training was successful.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".