↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of distance learning strategies for continuing professional development (CPD) for rural allied health practitioners: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
301 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effectiveness of distance learning strategies for continuing professional development (CPD) for rural allied health practitioners: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Medical Education, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0949-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela Berndt, Carolyn M. Murray, Kate Kennedy, Mandy J. Stanley, Susan Gilbert-Hunt

Abstract

Allied health professionals working in rural areas face unique challenges, often with limited access to resources. Accessing continuing professional development is one of those challenges and is related to retention of workforce. Effectiveness of distance learning strategies for continuing professional development in rural allied healthcare workers has not been evaluated. We searched 17 databases and the grey literature up to September 2016 following the PRISMA guidelines. Any primary studies were included that focussed on allied health and distance delivery regardless of education topic or study design. Two independent reviewers extracted data and critically appraised the selected studies. The search returned 5257 results. With removal of duplicate references, we reviewed 3964 article titles and abstracts; n = 206 appeared potentially eligible and were scrutinised via full text screening; n = 14 were included. Studies were published between 1997 and 2016, were of varied methodological quality and were predominantly from Australia, USA and Canada with a focus on satisfaction of learners with the delivery method or on measures of educational outcomes. Technologies used to deliver distance education included video conference, teleconference, web based platforms and virtual reality. Early papers tended to focus more on the technology characteristics than educational outcomes. Some studies compared technology based delivery to face to face modes and found satisfaction and learning outcomes to be on par. Only three studies reported on practice change following the educational intervention and, despite a suggestion there is a link between the constructs, none measured the relationship between access to continuing professional development and workforce retention. Technology based options of delivery have a high utility, however the complex inter-relatedness of time, use, travel, location, costs, interactivity, learning outcomes and educational design suggest a need for more sophisticated consideration by educational providers. Registration with PROSPERO 30 June 2016: CRD42016041588 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 301 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 301 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 50 17%
Researcher 33 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Student > Bachelor 17 6%
Other 62 21%
Unknown 92 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 54 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 54 18%
Social Sciences 23 8%
Computer Science 15 5%
Arts and Humanities 14 5%
Other 40 13%
Unknown 101 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2020.
All research outputs
#6,859,040
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#1,174
of 3,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,258
of 312,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#15
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,356 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.