Net Promoter Score (NPS): What Does Net Promoter Score Offer in the Evaluation of Continuing Medical Education?

Katie Stringer Lucero, Katie Stringer Lucero

Abstract

Net promoter Score (NPS) has been used in many fields, such as software, clinical care, and websites, as a measure of customer satisfaction since 2003. With a single question, NPS methodology is thought to determine brand loyalty and intent to act based on experiences with the brand or product. In the current study, accredited continuing medical education or continuing education (CME/CE) was the product. Providers of CME have utilised NPS rating (the individual score on a scale of 0 to 10) to collect data about the value of the experience a clinician has with CME activities, but there has been no research to examine what it actually is associated with. This study looked to understand - relative to other self-reported and assessment outcomes in CME, what does NPS at the activity level indicate? From 155 online CME programmes (29,696 target audience learners with complete data), potential outcomes of CME, including whether knowledge or competence improved via assessment score, mean post-confidence rating, and whether one intended practices changes and was committed to those changes, were examined as predictors of NPS. NPS is unique in that it cannot be calculated at the individual level; individual scores must be aggregated, and then the percentage who selected ratings of 0 to 5 is subtracted from the percentage who selected 9 or 10. Results showed that percentage of learners who are committed to change predicts 70% of the variance in NPS, which suggests NPS is a valid indicator of intention to act. These results have implications for how we might, as a field, incorporate the utilisation of a single standardised question to examine the potential impact of online CME and call for additional research on whether NPS predicts change in clinical practice.

Keywords: Outcomes; commitment to change; evaluation; intention to act; net promoter score.

Conflict of interest statement

This study has been solely submitted as original research to the Journal of European CME and is neither published nor is under consideration elsewhere.

© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

References

    1. Moore DE Jr, Green JS, Gallis HA.. Achieving desired results and improved outcomes by integrating planning and assessment throughout a learning activity. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2009;29:1–6.
    1. Ratanawongsa N, Thomas PA, Spyridon SM, et al. The reported validity and reliability of methods for evaluating continuing medical education: a systematic review. Acad Med. 2008;83(3):274–283.
    1. Hoover MJ, Jung R, Jacobs DM, et al. Educational testing validity and reliability in pharmacy and medical education literature. Am J Pharm Ed. 2013;77(10):A213.
    1. Lucero KS, Chen P. What do reinforcement and confidence have to do with it? A systematic pathway analysis of knowledge, competence, confidence, and intention to change. J Euro CME. 2020;9(1):1834759.
    1. Williams B, Kessler HA, Williams MV. Relationship among practice change, motivation, and self-efficacy. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2014;34:s5–s10.
    1. Lucero KS, Johnson SS. How confident are you that you are maximizing confidence assessments in your outcomes. Presentation at the Annual Meeting of the Alliance for Continuing Education in the Health Professions, San Francisco, California, Jan 9 2020.
    1. Fisher NI, Kordupleski RE. Good and bad market research: a critical review of net promoter score. Appl Stoch Models Bus Ind. 2019;35(1):138–151.
    1. Reichheld FF. The one number you need to grow. Harv Bus Rev. 2003;81(12):46–54.
    1. Krol MW, de Boer D, Delnoij D, et al. The net promoter score – an asset to patient experience surveys? Health Expectations. 2014;18:3099–3109.
    1. Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education . Educational needs. 2022. Nov 15.
    1. European Accreditation Council for Medical Education European . EACCME criteria for the accreditation of e-learning materials (ELM). 2022. Nov 15.
    1. Palmer K, Devers C. An evaluation of MOOC success: net Promoter Scores. In: Bastiaens T, Van Braak J, Brown M, et al., editors. Proceedings of EdMedia: world Conference on educational media and technology. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) (Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)). 2018. p. 1648–1653. 2021 Aug 23.
    1. Cook DA, Brydges R, Ginsburg S, et al. A contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane’s framework. Med Educ. 2015;49:560–575.
    1. Wakefield J, Herbert CP, Maclure M, et al. Commitment to change statements can predict actual change in practice. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2003;23(2):81–93.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit