ABSTRACT
Educational Technology (EdTech) has evolved. The technological advancements over the years provide new avenues for students to process content and expand critical thinking (Lakhana, 2014). Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, integrating technology has become an essential element of every teacher's instruction. The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of experienced teachers regarding the integration and impact of technology on student learning. The goal of this study is to discover ways to improve the experience of educational technology within the classroom and to support educators who are implementing educational technology. I sought to explore the perspectives of educators with more than fifteen years of experience due to their depth and breadth of knowledge, skills, and strategies in teaching. With their experiences involving access and implementation of educational technology, the intention is to focus on shedding light on how to support teachers' use of technology to increase student visible learning. Participant data was guided by Davis' Technology Acceptance Model and Magana's Theory of Disruptive Classroom Technology and T3 Framework to examine how teachers used technology and what influenced them to integrate EdTech into their classrooms. This study has implications that will support teacher integration of technology to improve the classroom experience and student learning. Teachers are willing and able to integrate technology into their classrooms if they have a supportive environment that includes a clear plan, professional development, and a support system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: A decline in routine vaccination was reported by some countries early in the COVID-19 pandemic. In the context of the pandemic, determinants of routine childhood vaccination may have changed. Changes over time in parents' perceptions of routine vaccines and intentions for their children during the pandemic have not been fully explored. Understanding changes provides opportunities to promote routine childhood vaccines and address factors that may compromise parents' acceptance. METHODS: We conducted longitudinal analysis of two sequential national surveys during the pandemic (Dec 2020 and Oct/Nov 2021) to assess changes over time in Canadian parents' perceptions of routine childhood vaccines, intentions to vaccinate, access for their children ≤ 17 years, and differences among sociodemographic characteristics. McNemar-Bowker tests were used to determine changes in parents' responses collected at two time points. RESULTS: Of the 650 parents in the sample, 25.1% with a child ≤ 6 years and 20.5% with a child 7-17 years perceived that routine childhood vaccines were more important because of the pandemic. Between the two time points, parents' confidence in the safety (72.8% to 80.2%, p <.001) and effectiveness (81.7% to 85.2%, p =.007) of routine vaccines increased, parents were more engaged in vaccine decision-making (73.4% to 79.8%, p =.006), and everyday stress preventing vaccination decreased (78.8% to 68.5%, p <.001). Acceptance of routine vaccines increased (82.9% to 86.5%, p =.021), but more parents were undecided about influenza vaccination (12.6% to 20.3%, p =.002). Compared to parents with 1 child, those with 2 children reported increased vaccination acceptance (82.6% to 87.4%, p =.024). INTERPRETATION: Under the spotlight of COVID-19, parents' confidence in routine vaccines, engagement in decision-making, and vaccination acceptance increased. Vaccination providers should support parents' decision-making as they navigate routine childhood vaccine uncertainties. Differences in parents' acceptance of routine and influenza vaccines for their children highlight the need for targeted communication strategies for specific vaccines.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic underlined that guidelines and recommendations must be made more accessible and more understandable to the general public to improve health outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate, quantify, and compare the public's understanding, usability, satisfaction, intention to implement, and preference for different ways of presenting COVID-19 health recommendations derived from the COVID-19 Living Map of Recommendations and Gateway to Contextualization (RecMap). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a protocol for a multi-method study. Through an online survey, we will conduct pragmatic allocation-concealed, blinded superiority randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in three populations to test alternative formats of presenting health recommendations: adults, parents, and youth, with at least 240 participants in each population. Prior to initiating the RCT, our interventions will have been refined with relevant stakeholder input. The intervention arm will receive a plain language recommendation (PLR) format while the control arm will receive the corresponding original recommendation format as originally published by the guideline organizations (standard language version). Our primary outcome is understanding, and our secondary outcomes are accessibility and usability, satisfaction, intended behavior, and preference for the recommendation formats. Each population's results will be analyzed separately. However, we are planning a meta-analysis of the results across populations. At the end of each survey, participants will be invited to participate in an optional one-on-one, virtual semi-structured interview to explore their user experience. All interviews will be transcribed and analyzed using the principles of thematic analysis and a hybrid inductive and deductive approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Through Clinical Trials Ontario, the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board has reviewed and approved this protocol (Project ID: 3856). The University of Alberta has approved the parent portion of the trial (Project ID:00114894). Findings from this study will be disseminated through open-access publications in peer-reviewed journals and using social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05358990 . Registered on May 3, 2022.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , Adult , Adolescent , SARS-CoV-2 , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Surveys and Questionnaires , Ontario , Meta-Analysis as TopicABSTRACT
Educational Technology (EdTech) has evolved. The technological advancements over the years provide new avenues for students to process content and expand critical thinking (Lakhana, 2014). Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, integrating technology has become an essential element of every teacher's instruction. The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions of experienced teachers regarding the integration and impact of technology on student learning. The goal of this study is to discover ways to improve the experience of educational technology within the classroom and to support educators who are implementing educational technology. I sought to explore the perspectives of educators with more than fifteen years of experience due to their depth and breadth of knowledge, skills, and strategies in teaching. With their experiences involving access and implementation of educational technology, the intention is to focus on shedding light on how to support teachers' use of technology to increase student visible learning. Participant data was guided by Davis' Technology Acceptance Model and Magana's Theory of Disruptive Classroom Technology and T3 Framework to examine how teachers used technology and what influenced them to integrate EdTech into their classrooms. This study has implications that will support teacher integration of technology to improve the classroom experience and student learning. Teachers are willing and able to integrate technology into their classrooms if they have a supportive environment that includes a clear plan, professional development, and a support system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved)
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To develop a reporting guideline for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. DESIGN: Development of the preferred reporting items for overviews of reviews (PRIOR) statement. PARTICIPANTS: Core team (seven individuals) led day-to-day operations, and an expert advisory group (three individuals) provided methodological advice. A panel of 100 experts (authors, editors, readers including members of the public or patients) was invited to participate in a modified Delphi exercise. 11 expert panellists (chosen on the basis of expertise, and representing relevant stakeholder groups) were invited to take part in a virtual face-to-face meeting to reach agreement (≥70%) on final checklist items. 21 authors of recently published overviews were invited to pilot test the checklist. SETTING: International consensus. INTERVENTION: Four stage process established by the EQUATOR Network for developing reporting guidelines in health research: project launch (establish a core team and expert advisory group, register intent), evidence reviews (systematic review of published overviews to describe reporting quality, scoping review of methodological guidance and author reported challenges related to undertaking overviews of reviews), modified Delphi exercise (two online Delphi surveys to reach agreement (≥70%) on relevant reporting items followed by a virtual face-to-face meeting), and development of the reporting guideline. RESULTS: From the evidence reviews, we drafted an initial list of 47 potentially relevant reporting items. An international group of 52 experts participated in the first Delphi survey (52% participation rate); agreement was reached for inclusion of 43 (91%) items. 44 experts (85% retention rate) completed the second Delphi survey, which included the four items lacking agreement from the first survey and five new items based on respondent comments. During the second round, agreement was not reached for the inclusion or exclusion of the nine remaining items. 19 individuals (6 core team and 3 expert advisory group members, and 10 expert panellists) attended the virtual face-to-face meeting. Among the nine items discussed, high agreement was reached for the inclusion of three and exclusion of six. Six authors participated in pilot testing, resulting in minor wording changes. The final checklist includes 27 main items (with 19 sub-items) across all stages of an overview of reviews. CONCLUSIONS: PRIOR fills an important gap in reporting guidance for overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. The checklist, along with rationale and example for each item, provides guidance for authors that will facilitate complete and transparent reporting. This will allow readers to assess the methods used in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions and understand the trustworthiness and applicability of their findings.
Subject(s)
Checklist , Health Facilities , Consensus , Delivery of Health Care , Delphi Technique , Humans , Research Design , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic heightened anti-Asian racism towards East Asian diasporas in North America. Experiences of racism encountered by East Asian communities have been documented to negatively impact their mental health. METHODS: A scoping review was undertaken following Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) methodology to (a) map the foci of literature on racism and the mental health of East Asian diasporas in North America and (b) identify gaps in the current literature. RESULTS: A total of 1309 articles were identified in May 2021. Based on the inclusion criteria, 35 records were included. Two distinct mental health foci were found: mental health outcomes and mental healthcare access and utilization. The majority (n = 22) of the articles focused on racism at the interpersonal level. Six articles provided anti-racism solutions at the individual level, such as overcoming biases. Five articles targeted anti-racism solutions from both the individual and institutional levels, while 1 article addressed barriers at the institutional level, such as dismantling sanctioned power hierarchies. CONCLUSION: The expanding knowledge base on COVID-19-related racial discrimination is reminiscent of previous literature examining the history of anti-Asian racism in North America. Greater attention is needed to navigate impactful anti-racism solutions for East Asian populations' mental health in North America.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Providing parents with resources that aid in the identification and management of acute childhood illnesses helps those parents feel better equipped to assess their children's health and significantly changes parental health-seeking behaviors. Some of these resources are limited by accessibility and scalability. Remote locations and staffing limitations create challenges for parents aiming to access their child's health information. Mobile health apps offer a scalable, accessible solution for improving health literacy by enabling access to health information through mobile devices. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study is to create an inventory of acute childhood illness apps that are available to North American parents and caregivers, assess their quality, and identify the areas in which future apps can be improved. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan to identify and summarize app information for parents and digital health researchers. The Google and Apple app marketplaces were used as search platforms. We built a list of search terms and searched the platforms for apps targeted at parents and related to acute pediatric illnesses in the United States and Canada. We assessed apps meeting the inclusion criteria using the Mobile App Rating Scale (MARS), a validated tool for assessing the quality of health apps. The MARS examines apps on 5 subscales: engagement, functionality, aesthetics, information quality, and subjective quality. Data were analyzed by MARS subscale averages and individual item scores. RESULTS: Overall, 650 unique apps were screened, and 53 (8.2%) were included. On a scale of 1-5, apps had an average engagement score of 2.82/5 (SD 0.86), functionality score of 3.98/5 (SD 0.72), aesthetics score of 3.09/5 (SD 0.87), information quality score of 2.73/5 (SD 1.32), and subjective quality score of 2.20/5 (SD 0.79). On the same scale of 1-5, app scores ranged from 2.2/5 to 4.5/5 (mean 3.2, SD 0.6). The top 3 MARS-scored apps were Baby and Child First Aid (4.5/5), Ada (4.5/5), and HANDi Paediatric (4.2/5). Taken together, the top 3 apps covered topics of emergency pediatric first aid, identification of (and appropriate response to) common childhood illnesses, a means of checking symptoms, and a means of responding to emergency situations. There was a lack of Canadian-based app content available to parents in both marketplaces; this space was filled with content originating primarily in the United Kingdom and the United States. In addition, published evidence of the impact of the included apps was poor: of 53 apps, only 5 (9%) had an evidence base showing that the app had been trialed for usability or efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need for evidence-based acute childhood illness apps of Canadian origin. This environmental scan offers a comprehensive picture of the health app landscape by examining trends in acute childhood illness apps that are readily available to parents and by identifying gaps in app design.
Subject(s)
Mobile Applications , Canada , Child , Delivery of Health Care , Health Behavior , Humans , ParentsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Moral distress is a complex ethical phenomenon that occurs when one is not able to act according to their moral judgement. Consequences of moral distress negatively impact nurses, patient care, and the healthcare system. There is limited evidence on specific approaches to prepare nurses to manage these ethical situations. AIM: The aim of this scoping review is to identify moral distress interventions for nurses who provide direct patient care, identify gaps in the current moral distress research, and determine areas of focus for future research on this topic. METHODS: We employed the framework outlined by Levac, Colquhoun, and O'Brien and Arksey and O'Malley to conduct a scoping review. These steps included the: identification of the research question, identification of relevant studies, study selection, charting the data, collating, summarizing, and reporting the results. We appraised the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: We identified 5206 articles from the selected databases. Once duplicates were removed, two independent reviewers each screened 4043 title and abstracts. We included 554 articles for full-text screening, with 10 studies included based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Study designs included before-after studies (n = 4), randomized control trials (n = 3), concurrent mixed-methods studies (n = 2), and one controlled before-after study. All studies were conducted in acute care settings. In four studies, interventions focused on informing nurses on moral distress. Two interventions focused on increasing the nurses' reflexivity on their workplace experiences. One intervention included formal clinical mentoring and clinical ethics support through interprofessional rounds. Two studies utilized a multicomponent intervention. The overall moral distress scores significantly decreased after intervention implementation in three included studies. Three additional studies showed significant differences in specific survey item scores (e.g., "provision of less-than-optimal care" and "caring for patients they did not feel qualified to care for"), as compared to overall scores, after intervention implementation. In 70% of studies the amount of quality criteria met were 60% or higher according to the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. CONCLUSION: Our review is the first to synthesize intervention studies pertaining to moral distress among nurses. The findings of this review demonstrate that there is no clear pattern regarding which strategies consistently minimize the effects of moral distress among nurses. Future interventions should be tested more broadly by increasing the sample size, assessing length of intervention in relation to moral distress scores, expanding the interventions to other units and institutions, and including other healthcare professionals. Tweetable abstract: We reviewed interventions to help nurses with moral distress. Findings show no clear pattern of strategies to minimize their moral distress.