These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [The success of medical continuing education. Methods of evaluation--possibilities, limits and future developments].
    Author: Ollenschläger G, Klein-Lange M.
    Journal: Z Arztl Fortbild (Jena); 1997 Jan; 90(8):753-7. PubMed ID: 9133117.
    Abstract:
    The question, whether evaluation of continuing medical education (CME) is necessary, is discussed in Germany for several years. It is frequently criticized that the effects of continuing education on the medical practice and the quality of the patient care are hardly concrete. Evaluation is too often understood as a tool of external control rather than an instrument of self control and feedback for the teachers and organizers of CME events. The evaluation methods in use have many methodological shortcomings, i.e., lack of objectivity, reproducibility, feed back to the students, nearness to practice, and are therefore reason for the missing acceptance of the evaluation by physicians. Evaluation methods make sense if they contribute to efficient learning. They are supposed to aid in correctly assessing both the need and success of learning. These demands are currently most completely fulfilled by the Canadian "Maintenance of Competence Program" (MOCOMP), the applicability of MOCOMP in Germany is now proofed by the German chamber of physicians.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]