Skip to main content

Table 1 Characteristics and quality assessment of the included studies

From: Evidence for continuing professional development standards for regulated health practitioners in Australia: a systematic review

Study design

Author

Country

Participants

Study size

Relevant research question(s)

Quality

Systematic review and meta-analysis

Fontaine et al. [27]

Canada

Medical practitioners, nurses, health sciences students, mixed health professionals

21 studies

N = 3543 participants

RQ 2—type of CPD

High

Systematic review

Cant et al. [32]

Australia

Nurses

16 systematic reviews

RQ 2—type of CPD

High

Cervero and Gains [22]

United States

Medical practitioners

8 systematic reviews

RQ 2—type of CPD

Moderate

Granchi et al. [35]

Australia

Surgeons

19 studies

RQ 2—type of CPD

Medium

King et al. [34]

United Kingdom

Nurses

39 studies

RQ 2—type of CPD

Medium

Reeves et al. [31]

United Kingdom

Podiatrists, complementary therapists, dentists, dieticians, medical practitioners, hygienists, paramedics, psychologists, psychotherapists, midwives, nurses, pharmacists, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, radiographers, speech therapists, social workers, assistant practitioners, care/case co-ordinators and managers

25 studies

RQ 2—type of CPD

High

Rohwer et al. [25]

United Kingdom

Medical practitioners, nurses, physiotherapists, physician assistants, athletic trainers and mixed health professionals

24 studies

RQ 2—type of CPD

High

Rouleau et al. [28]

Canada

Registered nurses

22 systematic reviews

RQ 2—type of CPD

High

Samuel et al. [23]

United States

Medical practitioners, nurses, dentists, pharmacists, other allied health professionals, mixed professionals

63 syntheses

RQ 2—type of CPD

Medium

Vaona et al. [26]

Canada

Medical practitioners, nurses, childcare health consultants, mixed health professionals

16 RCTs

RQ 2—type of CPD

High

Vazquez-Calatayud et al. [55]

Spain

Nurses

9 studies

RQ 6—scope of practice

Medium

Randomised controlled trial

Mehta et al. [58]

United States

Rheumatologists

Intervention arm N = 26

Control N = 63

RQ 7—self-directed, peer or curriculum

Medium

Quasi-experimental study

Wu et al. [30]

Singapore

Nurse preceptors

Intervention arm N = 75

Control arm N = 75

RQ 2—type of CPD

Medium

Cohort

Kelsch et al. [37]

United States

Dental hygienists

Mandated N = 764

Not mandated N = 998

RQ 3—mandated CPD

Low

Neimeyer et al. [39]

United States

Psychologists

N = 790 participants

RQ 3—mandated CPD

Low

Rothke et al. [38]

United States

Psychologists

N = 5,215 participants

RQ 3—mandated CPD

Medium

Vandergrift et al. [14]

United States

Medical practitioners

Policy change N = 3,954

No change N = 15,609

RQ 1—quantity of CPD

Medium

Case control

Wenghofer et al. [40]

Canada

Medical practitioner

Cases N = 942

Controls N = 1,850

RQ 3—mandated CPD

High

Qualitative–mixed methods

College of Dental Hygienists of British Columbia

Canada

Dental hygienists

Survey N = 2,886

Survey of sub-set N = 71

Focus groups N = 13

RQ 1—quantity of CPD

RQ 7—self-directed, peer or curriculum

Medium

Drumm et al. [42]

Republic of Ireland

Pharmacists

N = 7 representatives of different accreditation bodies

RQ 4—accreditation

High

Schindel et al. [51]

Canada

Pharmacists

Focus groups N = 42

Survey N = 416

RQ 6—scope of practice

Medium

Qualitative–semi-structured interviews

Austin and Gregory [52]

Canada

Pharmacists

N = 20 participants

RQ 6—scope of practice

Medium

Hobbs et al. [54]

Australia

Paramedics

N = 10 participants

RQ 6—scope of practice

Medium

Correlational

Horn et al. [56]

United States

Paediatric nurses

N = 74 participants

RQ 6—scope of practice

Low

Yardbrough et al. [57]

United States

Nurses

N = 67 participants

RQ 6—scope of practice

Low

Cross-sectional

Buttars et al. [36]

United States

Psychologists

N = 294 participants

RQ 2—type of CPD

Low

Fairs [53]

New Zealand

Osteopaths

N = 303 participants

RQ 6—scope of practice

Medium

Novakovitch [41]

United States

Nurses

N = 10 webinars

RQ 4—accreditation

Low

Salinas et al. [29]

United States

Medical practitioners

N = 605 CME activities

RQ 2—type of CPD

Low

Narrative review

Atesok et al. [18]

United States

Orthopaedic residents

21 studies

RQ 1—skills fade

Medium

Gawad et al. [19]

Canada

Surgical residents, faculty members

5 cohort studies

RQ 1—quantity of CPD

Medium

Maddocks et al. [17]

New Zealand

Military GPs, ICU/emergency nurses, military and civilian nurses, resident medical officers

10 studies

RQ 1—quantity of CPD

Medium

Wallace and May [21]

United States

Medical practitioners

62 studies

RQ 2—type of CPD

Medium

Descriptivea

Clark [50]

Canada

Occupational therapists

n/a

RQ 6—scope of practice

n/a

McMahon et al. [48]

United States

Medical practitioners

n/a

RQ 4—accreditation

n/a

Regnier et al. [33]

United States

Medical practitioners

n/a—includes 3 cases

RQ 2—type of CPD

n/a

Regnier et al. [43]

Germany

Medical practitioners

n/a

RQ 4—accreditation

n/a

  1. aCritical appraisal of the descriptive studies was not possible; however, these have been included as the content is valuable to the topic area