Conceptual frameworks for evaluating continuing education in allied health

Houle's and Cervero's conceptual frameworks for the evaluation of continuing professional education are discussed and compared with Cervero's framework selected for summarizing literature from three databases about effectiveness of allied health professionals' continuing education. Articles on medicine and nursing were purposely eliminated, which resulted in very few studies available for analysis (22 in the past 20 years) that considered continuing education in allied health. Also, the category of allied health appeared to be a catchall for topics that did not neatly fall into areas such as medicine, nursing, dentistry, or pharmacy. Finally, most literature reviewed indicated that attendance was regarded as a part of evaluation along with end-of-program questionnaires assessing satisfaction. A smaller number measured changes in knowledge, skills, or attitudes, and less than one-third evaluated changes in performance. Only three articles referred to changes in patient outcomes. Most assessed only one outcome measure in addition to number of program participants. Only two studies used three or more evaluation methods. The evaluation methods employed in all 22 studies are critiqued and categorized with recommendations that future measures be made more rigorous, perhaps by strengthening validity through performance observation and record audits.