Instruments for Evaluating Undergraduate Medical Education in Complementary and Integrative Medicine: A Systematic...

Area of Science:

• Medical Education
• Complementary and Integrative Medicine (CIM)
• Educational Assessment

Background:

• Complementary and Integrative Medicine (CIM) education varies significantly across medical schools.
• Effective evaluation of CIM courses requires robust instruments to measure educational intervention impact.
• Existing evaluation tools for undergraduate CIM education need critical appraisal.

Purpose of the Study:

• To systematically identify and critically appraise qualitative and quantitative instruments used for evaluating CIM courses in undergraduate medical education.
• To assess the quality and scope of existing CIM evaluation instruments based on Kirkpatrick levels and psychometric properties.
• To provide a foundation for developing improved evaluation strategies in CIM education.

Main Methods:

• Systematic review of multiple databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, LIVIVO, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid/Embase) conducted in January 2023.
• Inclusion criteria focused on complete evaluation instruments for medical students reporting learning outcomes.
• Data extraction covered study design, intervention, instrument, and Kirkpatrick levels; instruments categorized as validated, nonvalidated, or qualitative.

Main Results:

• 100 studies met inclusion criteria, reporting on 14 validated, 7 qualitative, and 66 nonvalidated instruments.
• Most instruments were self-administered, assessed general CIM aspects and student attitudes, and primarily focused on lower Kirkpatrick levels (1-2b).
• Validated instruments showed good content validity and internal consistency but often lacked reliability and responsiveness; revalidation was frequently inadequate.

Conclusions:

• A comprehensive set of existing instruments can serve as a basis for developing better CIM course evaluations.
• Future research should prioritize instruments measuring higher-level outcomes (behavioral change, patient care impact) and employ rigorous study designs.
• Regular revalidation of instruments is crucial for ensuring their applicability and promoting evidence-based CIM training and competency assessment.