INSTITUTIONAL · CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
Evaluate what MICA contributes, explain what is measured and improve the campus using verifiable findings.
Proposed methodological framework · 7 November 2026. This document prepares an evaluation; it is not an approved research protocol, a results report or an accreditation.
Method contents
1. Aims and scope
Soraya Ayoub and Salim Larbani’s campus combines learning resources, formative exercises and personal activity records. Evaluation must distinguish access, use, knowledge demonstrated and skills observed under supervision.
- Check whether users can find, read and return to resources suited to their level.
- Improve the clarity of courses, explanations and revision links.
- Describe documentary quality and documented human reviews for specific versions.
- Study learning without treating a page visit, practice score or satisfaction as certified clinical competence.
MICA remains free and non-degree-awarding. This framework creates no official examination, public named ranking or patient-record collection.
2. Four separate indicator families
| Family | Measure to document | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|
| Technical | Successful journeys / journeys actually tested; errors; loading times. | Specify device, network, period and number of observations. An HTTP check is not a complete user journey. |
| Editorial | Versions with an attested scientific decision / versions in a defined corpus; missing dates and references. | A documentary date, reference or technical signature is not a human review. Keep unknown states separate. |
| Learning | Objective responses compatible with current versions, case participation and suggested revision. | Define the denominator. All-attempt history differs from the distinct-question summary. Uncalibrated short answers stay outside the score. |
| Educational research | Feasibility, user experience, pre/post knowledge and any comparator. | Report only after authorised collection, an analysis plan and bias assessment. No numerical effectiveness claim is made here. |
Each report must state population, period, resource version, numerator, denominator, exclusions and missing data. Use “insufficient data”, not zero, when a measure is unavailable. A registry covering only part of the corpus cannot establish an overall scientific-validation percentage.
3. A proposed three-stage pilot
Prepare before recruitment
Identify an educational lead and data lead; define the purpose (internal improvement or research), voluntary undergraduate students, residents and teachers, eligibility, participant information, and required permissions and review. Sample size and schedule must be agreed before launch.
Observe concrete tasks
- Find a course, identify its source and return to the reading position.
- Complete an authorised exercise, interpret its feedback and open a revision resource.
- Retrieve personal activity in Mon MICA; test mobile, keyboard and available languages.
- Record task success, measured time, difficulty and optional user feedback separately. Do not collect patient data or unnecessary identifying screenshots.
Evaluate and improve
Begin with feasibility and recurring difficulties. For knowledge evaluation, predefine objectives and a reviewed item bank, freeze versions, plan comparable pre/post forms and document other training. Comparative or causal analysis needs an appropriate protocol; a simple before/after change cannot establish that MICA caused it.
4. Review and responsibility
Editorial, scientific, linguistic and technical quality must be tracked separately. A scientific decision must identify the resource, exact version, authorised human reviewer, date and scope. A substantive modification must not automatically inherit a previous version’s validation.
Reader-facing provenance and the administrative registry identify what is documented and what remains incomplete. They do not mean that the council has approved every resource. Doses, medicines, procedures, emergencies and calculators take review priority; algorithms and units require their own tests.
Item analysis must account for administration conditions and item versions. Required sample size and methods depend on the intended analysis; discrimination, reliability or difficulty estimates must not be fabricated from inadequate samples.
5. Privacy and access
The optional questionnaire, personal results and portfolio remain separate systems. A self-declared profession does not grant access to other people’s results. Supervision uses the existing permissions and voluntary sharing, without automatically forming cohorts from campus accounts.
- Collect only necessary variables. Do not export identifiers, email addresses, identifying free text or small cells that enable re-identification.
- Pseudonymisation is not anonymisation. Linking datasets requires an explicit purpose and permissions.
- Before a pilot or research export, document recipients, security measures, retention, possible withdrawal and rights procedures. This page activates no new retention period or data collection.
- Public reports must be aggregated and checked. Individual records and raw comments must not become public.
6. Work status and proposed reports
This working framework, existing formative tools and feedback channels prepare a structured evaluation. This page attests to no recruitment, study findings, ethics decision or educational effectiveness. Teacher groups and cross-resource scientific signatures require defined and tested authorisation and decision models.
Once the method is approved and data are available, propose a dated quarterly report: scope and version; checks performed; difficulties; available and missing data; completed corrections; next priorities; limitations. This document does not schedule reports automatically.
New factual findings will be added with their date, method and source. Descriptive results, hypotheses and research conclusions will remain clearly distinguished.
Use the existing spaces
Reference frameworks
- WFME — Basic Medical Education, 2020
- WFME — Postgraduate Medical Education, 2023
- WFME — Distributed and Distance Learning, 2021
- GMC — Designing and maintaining postgraduate assessment programmes
Editions identified on official pages consulted on 7 November 2026. These frameworks inform local reflection. MICA claims neither WFME accreditation nor GMC recognition.