CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 145Innovations in Medical EducationHealth Sciences Research and EducationHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation

Impact studies in continuing education for health professions: update

Robertson, Mary Kathryn, Umble, Karl E., Cervero, Ronald M.·2003·Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions
DOI 10.1002/chp.1340230305
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This article critiques the questions asked and methods used in research syntheses in continuing education (CE) in the health professions, summarizes the findings of the syntheses, and makes recommendations for future CE research and practice. METHODS: We identified 15 research syntheses published after 1993 in which primary CE studies were reviewed and the performance (behavior) of health professionals and/or patient health outcomes were examined. RESULTS: The syntheses were categorized by the research questions they asked using a wave metaphor. Wave One (n = 3) syntheses sought to establish a general descriptive causal connection between CE and impact variables, asking, "Is CE effective, and for what outcomes?" Wave Two syntheses (n = 12) sought to explain the relationship between CE and impacts by identifying causal moderators, asking, "What kinds of CE are effective?" DISCUSSION: Wave One findings confirm previous research that CE can improve knowledge, skills, attitudes, behavior, and patient health outcomes. Wave Two syntheses show that CE, which is ongoing, interactive, contextually relevant, and based on needs assessment, can improve knowledge, skills, attitudes, behavior, and health care outcomes. The most important implication of the present review is that there are differential impacts of CE programs, and the reasons for those impacts cannot be fully understood unless the context of the program is considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/chp.1340230305

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Existing evidence about the design and outcomes of CCPs is mixed.

    “Although mandatory continuing professional development is an approach that is used widely by professional regulators globally, existing evidence about the design and outcomes of CCPs is mixed [18,247–251].”

    From Nursing regulation in Canada: Insights from a scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [248]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Robertson, M. K., Umble, K. E., & Cervero, R. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Georgia (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2003
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
146-156
ISSN
0894-1912 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1002/chp.1340230305
OpenAlex
W1994389749
Cited by
145
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
FWCI
1.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1 (tdm, 4626 d)
Locations
  • Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Sciences Research and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Human Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Keywords
continuing education, health professions education, health professionals' practices, patient outcomes, needs assessment, interactive learning, program context, knowledge, skills and attitudes
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Education, Medical, Continuing, Educational Measurement, Humans, Research Design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review