Dave S Kerby1, Michael W Brand, David L Johnson, Farooq S Ghouri. 1. Department of Health Promotion Sciences, College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK 73190, USA. dave-kerby@ouhsc.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine effective ways to evaluate public health workers' competence for preparedness. METHODS: The Public Health Ready project, developed by the National Association of County and City Public Health Officials and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is a pilot program designed to prepare local public health agencies to respond to emergency events. Workers at a Public Health Ready site (N=265) rated their need for training and their competence in meeting generic emergency response goals. Cluster analysis of cases was conducted on the self-assessed need for training. RESULTS: Three groups of workers emerged, differing in their overall ratings of need for training. A given worker tended to report similar needs for training across all training goals. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, workers' ratings of need for training may reflect an overall interest in training rather than need for training in a particular area. Caution should be exercised in interpretation when generic goals and self-assessment are used to measure need for training. Future assessments of training needs may be more effective if they use objective measures of specific local plans.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine effective ways to evaluate public health workers' competence for preparedness. METHODS: The Public Health Ready project, developed by the National Association of County and City Public Health Officials and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is a pilot program designed to prepare local public health agencies to respond to emergency events. Workers at a Public Health Ready site (N=265) rated their need for training and their competence in meeting generic emergency response goals. Cluster analysis of cases was conducted on the self-assessed need for training. RESULTS: Three groups of workers emerged, differing in their overall ratings of need for training. A given worker tended to report similar needs for training across all training goals. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, workers' ratings of need for training may reflect an overall interest in training rather than need for training in a particular area. Caution should be exercised in interpretation when generic goals and self-assessment are used to measure need for training. Future assessments of training needs may be more effective if they use objective measures of specific local plans.
Authors: Kristine A Qureshi; Jacqueline A Merrill; Robyn R M Gershon; Ayxa Calero-Breckheimer Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Tammie E Quest; J Alan Otsuki; John Banja; Jonathan J Ratcliff; Sheryl L Heron; Nadine J Kaslow Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2002-11 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Leslie M Beitsch; Samata Kodolikar; Tim Stephens; Daniel Shodell; Art Clawson; Nir Menachemi; Robert G Brooks Journal: Public Health Rep Date: 2006 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.792
Authors: Jiejing Hao; Jiaojiao Ren; Qunhong Wu; Yanhua Hao; Hong Sun; Ning Ning; Ding Ding Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2017-06-04 Impact factor: 3.390