The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
eLearning: A review of Internet-based continuing medical education
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective was to review the effect of Internet-based continuing medical education (CME) interventions on physician performance and health care outcomes. METHODS: Data sources included searches of MEDLINE (1966 to January 2004), CINAHL (1982 to December 2003), ACP Journal Club (1991 to July/August 2003), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (third quarter, 2003). Studies were included in the analyses if they were randomized controlled trials of Internet-based education in which participants were practicing health care professionals or health professionals in training. CME interventions were categorized according to the nature of the intervention, sample size, and other information about educational content and format. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria. Six studies generated positive changes in participant knowledge over traditional formats; only three studies showed a positive change in practices. The remainder of the studies showed no difference in knowledge levels between Internet-based interventions and traditional formats for CME. DISCUSSION: The results demonstrate that Internet-based CME programs are just as effective in imparting knowledge as traditional formats of CME. Little is known as to whether these positive changes in knowledge are translated into changes in practice. Subjective reports of change in physician behavior should be confirmed through chart review or other objective measures. Additional studies need to be performed to assess how long these new learned behaviors could be sustained. eLearning will continue to evolve as new innovations and more interactive modes are incorporated into learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Davis, D., O'Brien, M. A. T., Freemantle, N., Wolf, F. M., Mazmanian, P., & Taylor-Vaisey, A. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.9.867 · Cited by 2,364
Cited by
A Research Agenda for Online Teacher Professional Development
Dede, C., Jass Ketelhut, D., Whitehouse, P., Breit, L., & McCloskey, E. M. (2009) · Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1177/0022487108327554 · Cited by 666
Johnson, M. J., & May, C. R. (2015) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2015-008592 · Cited by 513
Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances
Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., & Pawson, R. (2010) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/1472-6920-10-12 · Cited by 441
The Use of Social Media in Graduate Medical Education: A Systematic Review
Sterling, M., Leung, P., Wright, D., & Bishop, T. F. (2017) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001617 · Cited by 365
E-Learning perception and satisfaction among health sciences students amid the COVID-19 pandemic
Abbasi, M. S., Ahmed, N., Sajjad, B., Alshahrani, A., Saeed, S., Sarfaraz, S., Alhamdan, R. S., Vohra, F., & Abduljabbar, T. (2020) · Work · doi:10.3233/wor-203308 · Cited by 300
Metadata
- Authors
- Wutoh, R., Boren, S. A., & Balas, A. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions
- Published
- 2004
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 20-30
- ISSN
- 0894-1912 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2130330545
- Cited by
- 409
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 15.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: eLearning: A review of Internet-based continuing medical education. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/chp.1340240105
- The paper
- Wutoh, R., Boren, S. A., & Balas, A. E. (2004). eLearning: A review of Internet-based continuing medical education. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.1340240105
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.