JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Critical evaluation of naloxone co-prescription academic detailing programs have overall been positive, but little research has focused on how participant thinking changes during academic detailing. The dual purposes of this study are to 1) present a metacognitive evaluation of a naloxone co-prescription academic detailing intervention and 2) describe the application of a metacognitive evaluation for future medical education interventions. Data were obtained from a pre/post knowledge assessment of an online, self-paced intervention. To assess metacognition, items were designed with confidence-weighted true-false (CTF) scoring. Multiple metacognitive scores were calculated: three content knowledge scores and five CTF scores. Statistical analysis examined whether there were significant differences in scores before and after intervention. Analysis of overall content knowledge showed significant improvement at post-test. There was a significant positive increase in absolute accuracy of participant confidence judgements, confidence in correct probability, and confidence in incorrect probability. Overall, results suggest an improvement in content knowledge scores after intervention and, metacognitively, suggest individuals were more confident in their answer choices, regardless of correctness. Implications include the potential of metacognitive evaluation to assess nuances in learner performance during academic detailing interventions.