Literature DB >> 15198176

Assessing the learning needs of maternal and child health professionals to teach health promotion.

Henry H Bernstein1, Sarah Rieber, Rebecca A Stoltz, David E Shapiro, Kara M Connors.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess skills and preferred learning formats in teaching health promotion (HP).
METHODS: A self-administered needs assessment of Maternal and Child Health (MCH) educators from multiple disciplines was conducted on a convenience sample taken nationally via e-mail using Dillman's method. Respondents rated ability to use, and desire to improve skills in, different teaching strategies (brainstorming, case method, collaborative learning, mini-presentation, reflective exercise, role play) and health concepts (partnership, communication, HP/illness prevention, time management, education, advocacy). Preferred learning formats were assessed with 5-point Likert scale and were analyzed using ANOVA.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of respondents (n = 180) taught in an urban setting, 26% suburban, and 17% rural. Most taught at academic health centers (35%), public health clinics (25%), or hospitals (17%). Seventy-five percent were female; average age was 42 years (SD--9.1 years). Specific disciplines showed no major difference in mean responses compared with others. The greatest barriers to integrating HP into teaching were time (82%) and budget (58%). Although a majority of all respondents felt comfortable in their abilities to use the teaching strategies and concepts, an equal percentage still wanted to improve these skills. One-third of respondents had experience using web-based study: 64% of them indicated web-based study as their preferred method of continuing education.
CONCLUSIONS: While a majority of MCH educators felt confident using various teaching strategies to teach the integration of HP into practice, most still wished to improve their personal skills. Use of an inexpensive, time-efficient modality to access and learn to teach HP was appealing to respondents across disciplines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15198176     DOI: 10.1023/b:maci.0000025731.88954.4b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Matern Child Health J        ISSN: 1092-7875


  18 in total

1.  Small-group CME using e-mail discussions. Can it work?

Authors:  J N Marshall; M Stewart; T Ostbye
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 3.275

2.  Communication and information technology in medical education.

Authors:  J P Ward; J Gordon; M J Field; H P Lehmann
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-03-10       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Health surveys in the workplace: comparison of postal, email and World Wide Web methods.

Authors:  R Jones; N Pitt
Journal:  Occup Med (Lond)       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 1.611

4.  Student test scores are improved in a virtual learning environment.

Authors:  H R Goldberg; G M McKhann
Journal:  Adv Physiol Educ       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.288

5.  Bringing faculty development to community-based preceptors.

Authors:  John P Langlois; Sarah B Thach
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 6.893

6.  A descriptive study of registered nurses' experiences with web-based learning.

Authors:  Lynda Atack; James Rankin
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 3.187

7.  Web-based orthodontic instruction and assessment.

Authors:  Ruangrat Komolpis; Richard A Johnson
Journal:  J Dent Educ       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.264

8.  Columbia University's Informatics for Diabetes Education and Telemedicine (IDEATel) Project: rationale and design.

Authors:  Steven Shea; Justin Starren; Ruth S Weinstock; Paul E Knudson; Jeanne Teresi; Douglas Holmes; Walter Palmas; Lesley Field; Robin Goland; Catherine Tuck; George Hripcsak; Linnea Capps; David Liss
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.497

9.  Can a Back Pain E-mail Discussion Group improve health status and lower health care costs?: A randomized study.

Authors:  Kate R Lorig; Diana D Laurent; Richard A Deyo; Margaret E Marnell; Marian A Minor; Philip L Ritter
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2002-04-08

Review 10.  An online discussion for medical faculty: an experiment that failed.

Authors:  Yvonne Steinert; Peter J McLeod; Larry Conochie; Louise Nasmith
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 6.893

View more
  2 in total

1.  MCH needs assessment capacity shows ongoing improvement; but, meager MCH evaluation capacity may impede performance.

Authors:  Greg Alexander; Donna Petersen
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2004-06

2.  Preparing Child Care Health Consultants to address childhood overweight: a randomized controlled trial comparing web to in-person training.

Authors:  Sara E Benjamin; Deborah F Tate; Shrikant I Bangdiwala; Brian H Neelon; Alice S Ammerman; Janice M Dodds; Dianne S Ward
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2007-08-23
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.