What AchieveCE learners are saying

Please update references and provide a Table of Contents. I felts as if I wa progressing blindly through the material and did not know what was next.

Needs to be re-evaluated to meet the needs of nurses, not physicians or pharmacists.

I fully expected this to be a video training, but it's all reading. I had a difficult time staying focus as it was very "dry" material. It would have been far more interesting had it been presented with video. In this age of Ai, I find this completely unnecessary to not present a course using video.

1. It's boring 2. The text needs to be updated to match the auditory presentation 3. The auditory presentation needs to read the words correctly 4. The auditory presentation does not need to state the sources as there is a bibliography.

Very detailed info, some seemed directed for physicians. Others great for nursing knowledge.

The title suggested a broader topic, but the course simply provided information on 3 new medications

There were answers in the HIV section that were incorrectly scored, please review.

Really expected more detail. Needs graphics to demonstrated the measures required. Sometimes the terminology isn't clear.

I found this course to be educational. I do feel some of the modules are meant for NP's & MD's however, it was a nice learning experience.

Majority of information was generally correct, but some of it was outdated by 3-5 years at least. Unreliable cited sources for many statements, such as WebMD. Final exam had poorly constructed (and somewhat irrelevant) questions with an incorrect answer key.

while the information was good there is a case missing from the text that is tested on in the second half of the course.

I feel it was, in part, much more suited to educational needs of pharmacists

The exam at the end determines if you understood every single detail about the course .. there is a lot of information.

This course is not tailored for Florida and does not offer clinically relevant new information. it does however meet its requirements and objectives.

Content was good, but format was poor--too much scrolling (why not just put the text closer together to eliminate scrolling), bad typos (what is JCAHCO--isn't it TJC or JCAHO?), grammatical mistakes. Wouldn't recommend this.

Given I do not directly treat HIV, the level of detail in this course was unnecessary. Need to level up the course for those of us who are referring to specialists rather than trying to teach us specialist level info

The second half of the course was great! The first half was too pharmacy based.

I printed out the course to read carefully. The pagination was inadequate - why not just indicated page numbers from 1- the last page? Also the questions were disorganized so a clear review of the materials and coherent questions was impossible. Far more difficult than it needed to be!

I just needed the HIV course, got the bundle by mistake. Got a lot of valuable information from the Medical errors course. Some tests have incorrect answers and that got me really confused. I had to go back and read the topic again to realize I wasn't wrong.

Nothing especially interesting or new information. Just to correct however... It says that acupuncture expanded after Nixon went to China in 1972. Actually the Black Panthers and Young Lords helped bring acupuncture to the US.

There were so many lectures on the exact same topics, pretty much, a lot of redundancy regrading opiod use and addiction. There was a lot of useful and interesting information. As an RN, the pharmacology questions were irrelevant for the field unless you are an APN and prescribing medication. The quiz questions asked about what medication you'd prescribe or change for the patient and that is out of the scope of practice for an RN.

This is about 10 pages of reading followed by a quiz. It's not an online course that goes into any depth of actual practice or application. It's the same information probably copied and pasted from a Google page. Not exactly what I was hoping for.

It fulfilled the requirements; way too much drug data on HIV section. overall an 80.

There was perhaps too much in-depth pharmacology for a nurse with limited knowledge of these concepts. Overall, it was worthwhile.