Evaluation of best practices in the design of online evidence-based practice instructional modules.
Objectives: The research determined to what extent best practices are being followed by freely available online modules aimed at teaching critical thinking and evidence-based practices (EBPs) in health sciences fields. Methods: In phase I, an evaluation rubric was created after reviewing the literat...
| Publicado en: | Journal of the Medical Library Association Vol. 102; no. 1; pp. 31 - 41 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | forms research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
University of Pittsburgh, University Library System
Jan2014
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=107882468&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 107882468 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 15365050 PI8 jtl: Journal of the Medical Library Association issn: 15365050 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jan2014 vid: 102 iid: 1 pid: 60406 pub: University of Pittsburgh, University Library System place: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 107882468 94070136 10.3163/1536-5050.102.1.007 NLM24415917 PMC3878933 107882468 ppf: 31 ppct: 10 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Evaluation of best practices in the design of online evidence-based practice instructional modules. aug: au: Foster, Margaret J. Shurtz, Suzanne Pepper, Catherine affil: Systematic Reviews and Research Coordinator, Medical Sciences Library, Texas A&M University, 4462 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843-4462 sug: subj: Curriculum Development Education, Non-Traditional Medical Practice, Evidence-Based Libraries, Health Sciences Texas Human Texas Medline Psycinfo ERIC Database Teaching Materials CINAHL Database T-Tests kappa Statistic P-Value ab: Objectives: The research determined to what extent best practices are being followed by freely available online modules aimed at teaching critical thinking and evidence-based practices (EBPs) in health sciences fields. Methods: In phase I, an evaluation rubric was created after reviewing the literature. Individual rubric questions were assigned point values and grouped into sections, and the sections weighted. Phase II involved searching Internet platforms to locate online EBP modules, which were screened to determine if they met predetermined criteria for inclusion. Phase III comprised a first evaluation, in which two authors assessed each module, followed by a second evaluation of the top-scoring modules by five representatives from different health sciences units. Results: The rubric's 28 questions were categorized into 4 sections: content, design, interactivity, and usability. After retrieving 170 online modules and closely screening 91, 42 were in the first evaluation and 8 modules were in the second evaluation. Modules in the first evaluation earned, on average, 59% of available points; modules in the second earned an average of 68%. Both evaluations had a moderate level of inter-rater reliability. Conclusions: The rubric was effective and reliable in evaluating the modules. Most modules followed best practices for content and usability but not for design and interactivity. Implications: By systematically collecting and evaluating instructional modules, the authors found many potentially useful elements for module creation. Also, by reviewing the limitations of the evaluated modules, the authors were able to anticipate and plan ways to overcome potential issues in module design. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: forms research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|