Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Mar 30.
Published in final edited form as: Pediatrics. 2009 Feb 9;123(3):e476–e483. doi: 10.1542/peds.2008-2193

Table 3. Comparison of Average Ranks for UAMS and Remote participants.

Evaluation Criteria UAMS Remote F p
Presentation related to my needs.* 4.68 4.47 12.9 0.000
Presentation increased my knowledge.* 4.73 4.59 7.00 0.008
Presentation met my expectations.* 4.67 4.52 5.32 0.022
Length of the presentation was appropriate. 4.69 4.61 1.81 0.179
Material was well presented.* 4.75 4.63 5.70 0.017
Presenter was knowledgeable.* 4.84 4.72 7.45 0.007
Presenter made time for questions.* 4.82 4.70 6.77 0.010
Information will enhance patient care.* 4.70 4.51 8.73 0.003
This technology was satisfactory.* 4.65 4.51 4.12 0.043
The technology was as effective as traditional methods.* 4.65 4.46 6.07 0.014
I would take other courses with this technology. 4.69 4.71 0.10 0.752
This technology is the most convenient way for me to obtain this training. 4.60 4.71 3.08 0.080