What AchieveCE learners are saying

The coutse material adequately covered the topic based on the material they were given. I gave 2 stars because I disagree with some of the material.

Too much "straight" reading... The test was trying to be TRICKY by asking specific numbers (percentages, years, etc) rather than accessing knowledge.

My late mother was an Early Childhood professor and one of my maternal aunts spent over 50 years teaching children with development disorders. The course repeatedly featured photos of children appearing to have Down Syndrome which is absoulutely not connected with Spectrum Disorders

Too many of the modules were for PharmD students which clearly is not for RNs. While the overall subject is valuable the perspective has very little to do with nursing. It feels like the decision to include this material was done without reviewing the modules for appropriateness for the audience.

I had to use a public computer to do this and found the coursework not entirely enjoyable.

I liked some of the courses and felt they were useful. Several were not. They were outdated, referenced the DSM IV instead of the DSM 5, referenced Canada, or spoke specifically to medical professionals. I found this frustrating.

would like to know more effects of cyberbullying and ways to treat

This course is severely outdated. The most recent study it quoted was from 2010 and there was no information on the COVID pandemic and quarantine of 2020 and 2021. This being an incredibly relevant national event to almost every aspect of this presentation. This was probably a great course over a decade ago but lacks relevance today.

It is above the skill level of most Speech Pathologists and then after paying $15 personally, it becomes a "must-do."

This course is very medical based and as an SLP it isn't very applicable. But a lot of information.

Citations over a decade old does not provide current continuing education in a quality manner.

Reporting does not make sense. Question 8 isnt a question and it is unclear how to report once you move past the response section

This had some great information, but too many small details to remember.

This course is a simplistic overview. Many of the references are over 10 years old and should be updated. No mention of AI which is playing a critical role in shaping telemedicine currently and its impact on patients and clinicians is not mentioned.

Please look at question #9. Both the first AND the last answer are correct. Long action injectable buprenorphine IS available 300mg/IM monthly as well as being associated with REMS.

specific to a particular study as opposed to the application to pain in general

Permissions are state specific it is difficult to test on general questions when states differ in rules

seems out of date as some of the laws mentioned were set to expire 6-7 years ago; the physician speaker was a very worthwhile addition

A lot of repitition. Graphics contained the same information as the text. Layout was not intuitive. I am a fast reader and it took longer than expected.

Dates of inception of programs should not be the focus of error prevention.

A lot did not apply to my practice as a PEDIATRICIAN. There were questions about FLORIDA law and my license is for TEXAS. Too wordy

Some test answers were incorrect - 20 hours of didactic instruction and clinical experience was stated in the learning and the question listed 10 hours. Sounded like a trick question.

Referenced citations are too old, and information is not presently relevant to the topic.

Pretty awful, actually. I had to reach out to customer service to make sure this would satisfy the Texas ethics requirement. There was absolutely nothing about Texas, only Florida. It was also not specific to my licensing board so I was tested over ethics codes for licenses I do not hold. Very disappointed.