| Literature DB >> 24200498 |
Ashish Joshi1, Susan Wilhelm, Trina Aguirre, Kate Trout, Chioma Amadi.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Computer technology can be effectively used to educate patients and improve knowledge and attitudes, leading to healthier behavior. Among rural women, breastfeeding outcomes seem to be worst compared to women living in urban areas. The implementation of a bilingual computer mediated health education program to disseminate information and improve outcomes among users with low literacy levels has proven to be successful.Entities:
Keywords: breastfeeding; computer; education; evaluation; usability
Year: 2013 PMID: 24200498 PMCID: PMC3841348 DOI: 10.2196/resprot.2872
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JMIR Res Protoc ISSN: 1929-0748
Modify PEMT to adapt to computer mediated breastfeeding educational program.
| Theory | Purpose | PEMT learning component |
| Information processing theory [ | Present information as a meaningful unit and limited to 5-9 pieces of information | Each slide includes limited educational content |
| Constructivist theory [ | Present information in a structured format simple to understand | The content presented on each screen is in a series of short messages |
| Cognitive flexibility theory [ | Information presented should be highly interconnected and relevant to the learner | The educational material is related to each other |
| Cognitive flexibility theory [ | Multiple content formats | Content is available as audio, images, and text |
| Cognitive load theory [ | Minimize working memory load | Information is presented as a series of short educational messages |
| Behavioral theory and Operant conditioning [ | Feedback given based on responses and positive reinforcement for healthy behaviors | Based on individual correct or incorrect response feedback is provided |
Figure 1Components of computer based education program.
Figure 2PEMT tailoring algorithm.
Study population characteristics (N=10).
| Variables | Responses | |
| Age, years | 28.0 (3.6; 23-35) | |
| Education ≥12 years | 9 (90) | |
| Marital status, married | 5 (50) | |
| Employment, full time | 8 (80) | |
| Income status, $40,000-49,000 | 3 (30) | |
| Smoking status, never smoked | 9 (90) | |
| # of children, mean (SD; range) | 2 (1; 0-4) | |
| Previous history of pregnancies | 2 (1; 0-4) | |
|
| ||
|
| Breastfeeding duration | None=3; 1-5 months=4; 6-12months=1; >12months=2 |
|
| Number of children breastfed | 1.44 (1; 0-3) |
|
| Previous history of taking prenatal classes; no | 9 (90) |
|
| Intent to take prenatal classes in the future; no | 8 (80) |
Figure 3Familiarity with the use of technology and breastfeeding information.
Task completion times, attempts, and assistance needed to complete the tasks (N=10).
| Task types | Task completion time, mean; (SD) range | Tasks completion during the 1st attempt, n (%) | No assistance needed, n (%) |
| T1 select age | 3.94; (1.42) 2.30-6.80 | 10 (100) | 10 (100) |
| T2 move to next slide | 2.11; (2.4) 0.5-8.50 | 9 (90) | 10 (100) |
| T3 pause program | 2.48; (1.31) 0.5-5.30 | 10 (100) | 10 (100) |
| T4 replay | 2.23; (1.38) 0.9-5.80 | 7 (70) | 10 (100) |
| T5 using help | 2.75; (1.96) 1.0-7.50 | 10 (100) | 10 (100) |
| T6 change settings | 3.89; (5.55) 0.8-19.40 | 9 (90) | 10 (100) |
Frequency distribution of the SUS.
| Variables | Frequency, n (%) | ||||
|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
| I think that I would like to use this system frequently. |
|
| 1 (10) | 3 (30) | 6 (60) |
| I found the system unnecessarily complex. | 10 (100) |
|
|
|
|
| I thought the system was easy to use. |
|
|
| 1 (10) | 9 (90) |
| I think that I would need the support of a technical person to be able to use this system. | 10 (100) |
|
|
|
|
| I found the various functions in this system were well integrated. |
|
|
| 4 (40) | 6 (60) |
| I thought there was too much inconsistency in this system. | 9 (90) |
|
|
| 1 (10) |
| I would imagine that most people would learn to use this system very quickly. | 1 (10) |
|
| 2 (20) | 7 (70) |
| I found the system very cumbersome to use. | 5 (50) | 1 (10) | 1 (10) |
| 3 (30) |
| I felt very confident using the system. | 1 (10) |
|
| 1 (10) | 8 (80) |
| I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this system. | 10 (100) |
|
|
|
|
Figure 4Frequency distribution of the program acceptance.