Evaluation of an online educational programme

for continuing professional development

(CPD) in psychopharmacology

Sepehr Hafizi

Consultant Psychiatrist- Cameo NorthAssociate Lecturer- School of Clinical Medicine

Introduction

• Background • Neuroscience Education Institute• Components of Master programme• E-learning Evaluation – criteria• NEI- evaluation results• Next steps• CLAHRC experience

BackgroundNeuroscience Education Institute

Continuing Professional Development

Better Patient Care

EvaluationEndorsement

NEI- Website

Fellowship Topics1. Basic Neuroscience2. Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder3. Anxiety Disorders4. Bipolar Disorder5. Dementia / Cognitive Disorders6. Pain7. Psychosis8. Sleep Disorders9. Substance Use Disorders10. Unipolar Depression 11. Professional Improvement

NEI – Master Programme• Pre-test and Post-test

Exams

• Fellowship activities:

Mechanism of Action

Snippet

Programme Evaluation- Criteria • Branch et al 1999- modified: • Accuracy – current, evidence-based, up to date • Appropriate– local practices, vocabulary,

humour, bias, stereotyping, user level of experience

• Presentation– clear & orderly• Link between purpose, content & activity –

redundancy, irrelevant activities• Complete & ready to use – breadth & depth • Engaging– interesting, challenging & clinical• Organised- organising tools, TOC, references

Evaluation- Overall Results I• 179 Fellowship activities evaluated:• Recommendations: • Approved without change (110)• Approved with minor change (56)• Approved with major change (4)• Not approved (8)• Unable to evaluate (1)

• Comments made

Evaluation- Overall Results II• Mechanisms of Action- excellent quality of

content, easy to understand with illustrations and video animations, accurate content

• Articles- most articles very relevant & appropriate, a few less informative, so can be removed

Evaluation- Overall Results III• Snippets- most excellent quality, some need

pause tab on video; some redundancy and repetition with e.g. ADHD activities, US centric humour in some videos

• Case study Drills- some would benefit from guidelines and international comparisons (less USA-centric), more references

• Self-assessment exams: relevant & accurate• Other: useful peer answers tool;

commercial interests declared;

Next Step • Second tier of evaluation by faculty experts• Live Cambridge conferences • Endorsement via CUHP• International CPD programme• Possibilities:• Mobile app• Team learning; Non-medical prescribers• ‘Knowing that’ ‘Knowing how’

(performance improvement)• Patient / health outcomes

CLAHRC Experience• What I learnt:• Psychopharmacology• E-learning evaluation literature• Challenges:• Technology- flash player• Methodology• Stakeholder interests• Future: co-ordination of large number of

experts

Summary • Continuing professional development• Neuroscience Education Institute• Evaluation of Master Programme:• Methods and Results• CLAHRC Experience• Next Steps• Patient care

Acknowledgements • Professor Peter Jones• Professor Stephen Stahl• NEI Staff• Richard Marley of CUP• Professor Mike Cook• CLAHRC Team • CLAHRC Fellows• Faculty Collaborators

Thank You

• Questions?