ABSTRACT
Simulation is an important training tool used in a variety of influential fields. However, development of simulation scenarios - the key component of simulation - occurs in isolation; sharing of scenarios is almost non-existent. This can make simulation use a costly task in terms of the resources and time and the possible redundancy of efforts. To alleviate these issues, the goal is to strive for an open communication of practice (CoP) surrounding simulation. To facilitate this goal, this report describes a set of guidelines for writing technical reports about simulation use for educating health professionals. Using an accepted set of guidelines will allow for homogeneity when building simulation scenarios and facilitate open sharing among simulation users. In addition to optimizing simulation efforts in institutions that are currently using simulation as an educational tool, the development of such a repository may have direct implications on developing countries, where simulation is only starting to be used systematically. Our project facilitates equivalent and global access to information, knowledge, and highest-caliber education - in this context, simulation - collectively, the building blocks of optimal healthcare.
ABSTRACT
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to develop and evaluate software to support a computer assisted mammography feedback program (CAMFP) to be used for continuing medical education (CME). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five radiologists from our region signed consent to participate in an institutional review board-approved film-reading study. The radiologists primarily assessed digitized mammograms and received feedback in five film interpretation sessions. A bivariate analysis was used to evaluate the joint effects of the training on sensitivity and specificity, and the effects of image quality on reading performance were explored. RESULTS: Interpretation was influenced by the CAMFP intervention: Sensitivity increased (Delta sensitivity = 0.086, P < .001) and specificity decreased (Delta specificity = -0.057, P = .04). Variability in interpretation among radiologists also decreased after the training sessions (P = .035). CONCLUSION: The CAMFP intervention improved sensitivity and decreased variability among radiologist's interpretations. Although this improvement was partially offset by decreased specificity, the program is potentially useful as a component of continuing medical education of radiologists. Dissemination via the web may be possible using digital mammography.
