Search Results (1 to 2 of 2 Results)
Download search results: CSV END BibTex RIS
Skip search results from other journals and go to results- 2 JMIR Medical Education
- 0 Journal of Medical Internet Research
- 0 Medicine 2.0
- 0 Interactive Journal of Medical Research
- 0 iProceedings
- 0 JMIR Research Protocols
- 0 JMIR Human Factors
- 0 JMIR Medical Informatics
- 0 JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
- 0 JMIR mHealth and uHealth
- 0 JMIR Serious Games
- 0 JMIR Mental Health
- 0 JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
- 0 JMIR Preprints
- 0 JMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology
- 0 JMIR Cancer
- 0 JMIR Challenges
- 0 JMIR Diabetes
- 0 JMIR Biomedical Engineering
- 0 JMIR Data
- 0 JMIR Cardio
- 0 JMIR Formative Research
- 0 Journal of Participatory Medicine
- 0 JMIR Dermatology
- 0 JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting
- 0 JMIR Aging
- 0 JMIR Perioperative Medicine
- 0 JMIR Nursing
- 0 JMIRx Med
- 0 JMIRx Bio
- 0 JMIR Infodemiology
- 0 Transfer Hub (manuscript eXchange)
- 0 JMIR AI
- 0 JMIR Neurotechnology
- 0 Asian/Pacific Island Nursing Journal
- 0 Online Journal of Public Health Informatics
- 0 JMIR XR and Spatial Computing (JMXR)
Go back to the top of the page Skip and go to footer section

How We Evaluate Postgraduate Medical E-Learning: Systematic Review
One study by Sears et al [39] used Robert and Mc Donald’s revision of Kirkpatrick’s levels, where the third and fourth levels fall into an overall practice domain and a new level, value, is added to better suit current technologies and continuing education approaches.
Overall, 19 studies (4%) used some form of tool to evaluate the e-learning design, and 13 tools were described in these studies. These 19 studies alone provided us with the methods and theories at which our initial research question was aimed.
JMIR Med Educ 2019;5(1):e13128
Download Citation: END BibTex RIS