The course evaluation consists of three parts: problem sets (40%), in-class discussion leading and participation (20%), and group project reports and presentations (40%).
The end of course evaluation consists of several questions which ask students to appraise (5 point scale; 1 = Less Satisfactory, 5 = More Satisfactory) the course in terms of overall quality, relevance to medical practice, course design, and encouragement of critical thinking.
The clinical evaluation consisted of thorough history-taking (including questioning about disease course, neurologic symptoms, signs of autonomic dysfunction, comorbidity, intoxications, and medication use), anthropometric measurements, and neurologic examination.
In addition, after the 8th out of 14 course sessions, an evaluation consisting of a focus group discussion and a short questionnaire that was handed out after the focus group were conducted.
The evaluation consisted of two steps.
The system evaluation consisted of two phases.
The evaluation consisted of three experiments.
Subsequent cardiac evaluation consisted of physical examination, and ECG recording every cycle, and echocardiography monitoring for L-VEF determination every two cycles during treatment, after the last course of chemotherapy, and at 3-month intervals during the follow-up period.
In medicine, evaluation consisted primarily of a structured question format.
Two systems were used to evaluate participant satisfaction: 1) A daily evaluation of each session based on informative content, usefulness, and presentation techniques, and 2) an end-of-course evaluation that consisted of questions concerning strengths, weaknesses, effectiveness, and general comments about the course.
