Presentation (CTI)

OBJECTIVES: Traditional educational evaluations primarily focus on learner satisfaction, corresponding to Kirkpatrick's level 1 (reaction), and provide limited information regarding the transfer of acquired knowledge and skills into real-world practice. This study aimed to assess training transfer among participants in a national evidence-based medicine and clinical practice guideline (CPG) capacity-building program and to develop a feedback framework to enhance educational effectiveness and knowledge translation.
METHODS: Participants who completed one of three expert education courses offered in 2025 were surveyed approximately three months after course completion. The target population included CPG developers, Korean medicine doctors, and Korean medicine students. Four domains were assessed using a 5-point Likert scale: practical application, organizational dissemination, performance improvement, and continuous learning. The evaluation domains were informed by training-transfer theory and aligned with the behavioral level (Level 3) of Kirkpatrick's evaluation model. In addition, thematic analysis of open-ended responses was performed to identify practical applications and unmet educational needs.
RESULTS: A total of 57 participants were included in the analysis. The overall training transfer score was 3.95±0.80 on a 5-point scale (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.74-4.16). Continuous learning (4.06±0.90) and practical application (4.02±0.79) showed relatively higher scores, whereas organizational dissemination (3.80±0.90) showed a relatively lower score. Thematic analysis revealed four major themes: immediate application of knowledge to research practice, translation of evidence into CPG development and clinical settings, self-directed continuous learning, and insufficient tools and resources for knowledge dissemination. Barriers to organizational dissemination were primarily associated with insufficient resources and support rather than lack of motivation. Based on these findings, an educational feedback framework was developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Training transfer evaluation conducted three months after course completion provided insights beyond traditional satisfaction surveys and facilitated the identification of areas requiring improvement. By closing the loop between evaluation and improvement, the feedback framework may support knowledge translation and sustainable evidence-based medicine education.