Title |
In pursuit of a valid information assessment method for continuing education: a mixed methods study
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Education, October 2013
|
DOI | 10.1186/1472-6920-13-137 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Soumya Bindiganavile Sridhar, Pierre Pluye, Roland Grad |
Abstract |
The Information Assessment Method (IAM) is a popular tool for continuing education and knowledge translation. After a search for information, the IAM allows the health professional to report what was the search objective, its cognitive impact, as well as any use and patient health benefit associated with the retrieved health information. In continuing education programs, professionals read health information, rate it using the IAM, and earn continuing education credit for this brief individual reflective learning activity. IAM items have been iteratively developed using literature reviews and qualitative studies. Thus, our research question was: what is the content validity of IAM items from the users' perspective? |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
Unknown | 50 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 18% |
Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
Researcher | 8 | 16% |
Other | 4 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
Other | 9 | 18% |
Unknown | 9 | 18% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Social Sciences | 11 | 22% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 14% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
Computer Science | 4 | 8% |
Psychology | 2 | 4% |
Other | 10 | 20% |
Unknown | 13 | 25% |