Educational Intervention Evaluation
Cross-source consensus on Educational Intervention Evaluation from 1 sources and 5 claims.
1 sources · 5 claims
Uses
Other
Other
Other
Other
Highlighted claims
- Phase 3 will co-design and pilot an educational intervention based on the framework from the first two phases. — Accelerating diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy through improved education: a mixed-methods study protocol from Myelopathy.org RECODE-DCM to define stakeholders, knowledge requirements and an optimal intervention strategy
- Follow-up at 6 to 12 months will assess knowledge retention and changes in referral or diagnostic behaviour. — Accelerating diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy through improved education: a mixed-methods study protocol from Myelopathy.org RECODE-DCM to define stakeholders, knowledge requirements and an optimal intervention strategy
- The pilot intervention will target one or more identified personas and reflect resource availability and educational trends. — Accelerating diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy through improved education: a mixed-methods study protocol from Myelopathy.org RECODE-DCM to define stakeholders, knowledge requirements and an optimal intervention strategy
- The steering group will select the pilot intervention using likely efficacy, affordability, practicality, and scalability. — Accelerating diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy through improved education: a mixed-methods study protocol from Myelopathy.org RECODE-DCM to define stakeholders, knowledge requirements and an optimal intervention strategy
- The current project does not assess patient outcomes, although they must eventually be measured to establish outcome improvement. — Accelerating diagnosis of degenerative cervical myelopathy through improved education: a mixed-methods study protocol from Myelopathy.org RECODE-DCM to define stakeholders, knowledge requirements and an optimal intervention strategy