 |
 |

Internet-Based Education for Health Professionals—Reply
 |
 |
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
 |
 |
In Reply: Dr Wong notes the limitations of quantitative syntheses in education, inasmuch as the study designs, interventions, participants, institutional contexts, and outcomes all represent sources of heterogeneity. These reviews, therefore, often fail to permit strong causal inferences. Realist reviews1 and other systematic efforts to summarize disparate sources of evidence will provide important insights beyond a pooled estimate. We think, however, that such heterogeneity need not remain the norm in the future. On the contrary, as researchers work collaboratively using common theoretical frameworks, intervention definitions, and outcomes, we expect evidence will accrue that can be systematically synthesized to illuminate practice and advance theory.
Dr Banzi and colleagues suggest the influence of novelty as a confounder in the results of our meta-analysis. Such effects have long been acknowledged in computer-assisted instruction.2 Although this confounding limits our ability to make causal claims, we doubt that novelty alone would account for the large . . . [Full Text of this Article]
David A. Cook, MD, MHPE
cook.david33@mayo.edu
Victor M. Montori, MD, MSc
Mayo Clinic College of Medicine Rochester, Minnesota
Anthony J. Levinson, MD, MSc
McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter
What's this?
RELATED LETTERS
Internet-Based Education for Health Professionals
Geoff Wong
JAMA. 2009;301(6):598-599.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Internet-Based Education for Health Professionals
Rita Banzi, Ivan Moschetti, and Lorenzo Moja
JAMA. 2009;301(6):599.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|