Training interventions for healthcare providers offering group-based patient education. A scoping review

ObjectivesTo provide overview of research on training interventions for healthcare providers aimed at promoting competencies in delivering group-based patient education.MethodsA systematic literature search identified relevant studies. Data was extracted on training details, study design, outcomes and experiences. Results were summarized and qualitative data analyzed using content analysis.ResultsTwenty-seven studies exploring various training interventions were included. Ten studies used qualitative methods, eight quantitative and nine mixed methods. Use of a comparison group, validated instruments and follow-up measures was rare. Healthcare providers’ reactions to training were mostly positive. Several studies indicated positive short-term effects on self-efficacy and knowledge. Results on observed skills and patient outcomes were inconclusive. Results on healthcare providers’ experience of delivery of group-based patient education following training were categorized into 1) Benefits of training interventions, 2) Barriers to implementation and 3) Delivery support.ConclusionsFurther evaluation of training for healthcare providers delivering group-based patient education is needed before conclusions on training efficacy can be drawn. The results indicate an expanding research field still in maturation.Practice implicationsEfficacy studies evaluating theoretically grounded training with clear attention on group facilitation and follow-up support are needed. Inclusion of validated instruments and long-term outcomes is encouraged.     

Faculty Development Program Models to Advance Teaching and Learning Within Health Science Programs

Within health science programs there has been a call for more faculty development, particularly for teaching and learning. The primary objectives of this review were to describe the current landscape for faculty development programs for teaching and learning and make recommendations for the implementation of new faculty development programs. A thorough search of the pertinent health science databases was conducted, including the Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), MEDLINE, and EMBASE, and faculty development books and relevant information found were reviewed in order to provide recommendations for best practices. Faculty development for teaching and learning comes in a variety of forms, from individuals charged to initiate activities to committees and centers. Faculty development has been effective in improving faculty perceptions on the value of teaching, increasing motivation and enthusiasm for teaching, increasing knowledge and behaviors, and disseminating skills. Several models exist that can be implemented to support faculty teaching development. Institutions need to make informed decisions about which plan could be most successfully implemented in their college or school.     

Prevalent diabetes and risk of total,colorectal, prostate and breast cancers in an ageing population: meta-analysis of individual participant data from cohorts of the CHANCES consortium

Background We investigated whether associations between prevalent diabetes and cancer risk are pertinent to older adults and whether associations differ across subgroups of age, body weight status or levels of physical activity.Methods We harmonised data from seven prospective cohort studies of older individuals in Europe and the United States participating in the CHANCES consortium. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the associations of prevalent diabetes with cancer risk (all cancers combined, and for colorectum, prostate and breast). We calculated summary risk estimates across cohorts using pooled analysis and random-effects meta-analysis.Results A total of 667,916 individuals were included with an overall median (P25–P75) age at recruitment of 62.3 (57–67) years. During a median follow-up time of 10.5 years, 114,404 total cancer cases were ascertained. Diabetes was not associated with the risk of all cancers combined (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86–1.04; I² = 63.3%). Diabetes was positively associated with colorectal cancer risk in men (HR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08–1.26; I² = 0%) and a similar HR in women (1.13; 95% CI: 0.82–1.56; I² = 46%), but with a confidence interval including the null. Diabetes was inversely associated with prostate cancer risk (HR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.77–0.85; I² = 0%), but not with postmenopausal breast cancer (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.89–1.03; I² = 0%). In exploratory subgroup analyses, diabetes was inversely associated with prostate cancer risk only in men with overweight or obesity.Conclusions Prevalent diabetes was positively associated with colorectal cancer risk and inversely associated with prostate cancer risk in older Europeans and Americans.Subject terms: Risk factors, Cancer epidemiology     

Comparison of Answer-Until-Correct and Full-Credit Assessments in a Team-based Learning Course

Objective. To assess the impact of awarding partial credit to team assessments on team performance and on quality of team interactions using an answer-until-correct method compared to traditional methods of grading (multiple-choice, full-credit).Methods. Subjects were students from 3 different offerings of an ambulatory care elective course, taught using team-based learning. The control group (full-credit) consisted of those enrolled in the course when traditional methods of assessment were used (2 course offerings). The intervention group consisted of those enrolled in the course when answer-until-correct method was used for team assessments (1 course offering). Study outcomes included student performance on individual and team readiness assurance tests (iRATs and tRATs), individual and team final examinations, and student assessment of quality of team interactions using the Team Performance Scale.Results. Eighty-four students enrolled in the courses were included in the analysis (full-credit, n=54; answer-until-correct, n=30). Students who used traditional methods of assessment performed better on iRATs (full-credit mean 88.7 (5.9), answer-until-correct mean 82.8 (10.7), p<0.001). Students who used answer-until-correct method of assessment performed better on the team final examination (full-credit mean 45.8 (1.5), answer-until-correct 47.8 (1.4), p<0.001). There was no significant difference in performance on tRATs and the individual final examination. Students who used the answer-until-correct method had higher quality of team interaction ratings (full-credit 97.1 (9.1), answer-until-correct 103.0 (7.8), p=0.004).Conclusion. Answer-until-correct assessment method compared to traditional, full-credit methods resulted in significantly lower scores for iRATs, similar scores on tRATs and individual final examinations, improved scores on team final examinations, and improved perceptions of the quality of team interactions.