Meagan Campol Haynes1, Nessa Ryan2, Mona Saleh3, Abigail Ford Winkel4, Veronica Ades5. 1. New York University Langone Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: Meagan.Campol@nyumc.org. 2. New York University Langone Medical Center, NYU College of Global Public Health, USA. Electronic address: Nessa.Ryan@nyumc.org. 3. New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: Mona.Saleh@med.nyu.edu. 4. New York University Langone Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: Abigail.Winkel@nyumc.org. 5. New York University Langone Medical Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: Veronica.Ades@nyumc.org.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Clinicians and researchers need an accurate tool assessing contraceptive knowledge in order to understand the effectiveness of teaching efforts. However, most widely used indices are outdated. The objective of this study is to create an evidence-based assessment tool and determine its validity and reliability for measuring contraceptive knowledge. STUDY DESIGN: The study team developed the 25-question multiple-choice tool entitled the Contraceptive Knowledge Assessment (CKA). Expert reviewers examined content validity and semistructured patient interviews acquired feedback on subject matter and comprehension. A two-tiered approach explored criterion validity via (1) comparison with the gold standard (Contraceptive Knowledge Inventory) and (2) comparison between groups with lower and higher contraceptive knowledge. Repeat testing after 2-4 weeks evaluated test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Six experts and seven patients provided feedback on the initial CKA. One hundred two reproductive-aged male and female patients and 27 medical students completed the final CKA with an overall mean patient score of 9/25 (36%). The mean score on the CKA was higher than the mean score on the gold standard (9.1 vs. 5.8, p<.001). Patients scored lower on the CKA than did medical students (9.1 [36.4%] vs.19.4 [77.6%], p<.005). There were no differences within patients' results with repeat testing over time (p=.667). CONCLUSIONS: The CKA is a valid and reliable tool to measure a patient's level of knowledge regarding contraception. This research tool may allow for the assessment of baseline knowledge, educational gaps, and improvement after an intervention. Knowledge may be lower than previous studies suggest, signifying need for improved education on contraception and better understanding of the relationship between knowledge and behavior change. IMPLICATIONS: The CKA provides an evidence-based, reliable, and validated assessment of contraceptive knowledge. This modern tool may help to determine the effectiveness of interventions to improve education on contraception.
OBJECTIVES: Clinicians and researchers need an accurate tool assessing contraceptive knowledge in order to understand the effectiveness of teaching efforts. However, most widely used indices are outdated. The objective of this study is to create an evidence-based assessment tool and determine its validity and reliability for measuring contraceptive knowledge. STUDY DESIGN: The study team developed the 25-question multiple-choice tool entitled the Contraceptive Knowledge Assessment (CKA). Expert reviewers examined content validity and semistructured patient interviews acquired feedback on subject matter and comprehension. A two-tiered approach explored criterion validity via (1) comparison with the gold standard (Contraceptive Knowledge Inventory) and (2) comparison between groups with lower and higher contraceptive knowledge. Repeat testing after 2-4 weeks evaluated test-retest reliability. RESULTS: Six experts and seven patients provided feedback on the initial CKA. One hundred two reproductive-aged male and female patients and 27 medical students completed the final CKA with an overall mean patient score of 9/25 (36%). The mean score on the CKA was higher than the mean score on the gold standard (9.1 vs. 5.8, p<.001). Patients scored lower on the CKA than did medical students (9.1 [36.4%] vs.19.4 [77.6%], p<.005). There were no differences within patients' results with repeat testing over time (p=.667). CONCLUSIONS: The CKA is a valid and reliable tool to measure a patient's level of knowledge regarding contraception. This research tool may allow for the assessment of baseline knowledge, educational gaps, and improvement after an intervention. Knowledge may be lower than previous studies suggest, signifying need for improved education on contraception and better understanding of the relationship between knowledge and behavior change. IMPLICATIONS: The CKA provides an evidence-based, reliable, and validated assessment of contraceptive knowledge. This modern tool may help to determine the effectiveness of interventions to improve education on contraception.
Authors: Heidi S Melbostad; Gary J Badger; Catalina N Rey; Lauren K MacAfee; Anne K Dougherty; Stacey C Sigmon; Sarah H Heil Journal: Subst Use Misuse Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 2.164
Authors: Muzeyi Wani; Janet Nakigudde; Hildah Tendo Nansikombi; Philip Orishaba; Dennis Kalibbala; Joan N Kalyango; Steven M Kiwuwa Journal: Afr Health Sci Date: 2022-03 Impact factor: 1.108