GCP Central Reviews 174

The set up of this elearning was completely illogical: theoretical questions asked before providing a proper theoretical framework, no proper overview of relevant (inter-)national laws, being bombarded with irrelevant stock pictures, interviews and "e mails with peers". I would sincerely suggest to review this e-learning to make it more concise and complete.

Many useful materials are available and I like the interview and email session that are vivid for readers to learn like from practice.

I liked the way information was presented. Information could be somewhat more practical though. The exam is difficult with a lot of grammatical errors or very long sentences. Also sometimes two answers can be right and it is a guess what they want.

The subject matter was well presented although, sometimes the letter seize and contrast can be improved

Easy to follow.

I found the course setup to be unhelpful. I became overwhelmed with information, which made it difficult to maintain a clear overview. Additionally, during the separate modules, questions were often posed before the relevant information was presented. This frequently resulted in incorrect answers or frustration, as I was left wondering, 'How should I know? I haven’t read this yet.' It would be more effective to ask these questions after each module.

Furthermore, a wide variety of training techniques are employed, including videos, questions, polls, animations, case studies, interviews, email conversations, and numerous additional downloadable documents whose purposes are often unclear. I suggest streamlining these methods by selecting only a few to enhance clarity and coherence throughout the course.

it was usefull to learn about updates and new procedures, without

Good structure of the training, relevant examples, clear explanation.
More information with regard to qualitative research would be nice.

Comprehensive and efficient overview of the EU-CTR legislation

The course is quite nice, but I did have some major complains. I conducted the course in English and the language is sometimes confusing, which might party stem from translations. Although I quite like the intermittent questions and usage of differing kinds of media, the reported information is not always identical with the information of the main text causing quite some confusions. Sometimes the answer possibilities were not described well, which led to me interpreting them differently and then not being able to understand why the reply was incorrect. Thus, it would be good to include not only why an answer was right but also why an answer was not correct. In total it would be better if the information was stated clearer, more direct as I was partly left confused after some sections.

Questions and answers were not very clear sometimes. Tested readingsskills in stead of knowledge skills. Some questions did not copletly seem to fit to the answers. For example a question in which was asked for "the how" but the answeroptions gave answer to "the who". Questions containes a lot of text, were nog always clear.
Got the feeling some questiones were ment to trick in stead of to test knowledge

I like the interactive way of learning. Since this topic is not new to me, it's good to quiz oneself while reading along. It's also good that one can always pause and resume from where they left off, so the training can fit into the working schedule more easily. Having said that, what I think can still be improved is the language in the English version. There are several typos or grammatical errors. While they don't affect understanding, they create a less professional impression.

I liked the different appealing didactic styles. It looks great. The exam is sometimes not so well translated from English tot Dutch though, resulting in faulty grammer. This is sometimes confusing. Even if you know the theory it is sometimes hard to tell what exact answer they want. The answers to the test are not always literarely in the training modules. You often have to deduct them. Learning the training modules by heart is no guarantee for succes. Not all medical specialties are in the profile

I think the obligation to open or download documents often can be offered as optional and not mandatory. In several modules this obligation hinders the progress of the course

Perfect and efficient way to learn all aspects of GCP

Clear explanation and clinical applicability

It was very interesting and i learned a lot. But the queations are not always helpfull to bring the theorie in practice.

Good informations

Very knowledgable trainer, with good insights how theory can be translated into practical execution around ICH-GCP & EU-CTIS.

The chapters of the course were well set-up and included relevant information. The time indicated was a good predication.

I sometimes struggled a bit with the formulation of the questions, as some of them were quite long and vague.

It would be helpful if you have all the number 1 till 40 listed under the questions so you can easily navigate to other questions instead of scrolling through the questions 1 for 1